Bad actors in the maritime industry engage in illegal behaviors after disabling their vessel's automatic identification system (AIS) - which makes finding such vessels difficult for analysts. Machine learning approaches only succeed in identifying the locations of these ``dark vessels'' in the immediate future. This work leverages ideas from the literature on abductive inference applied to locating adversarial agents to solve the problem. Specifically, we combine concepts from abduction, logic programming, and rule learning to create an efficient method that approaches full recall of dark vessels while requiring less search area than machine learning methods. We provide a logic-based paradigm for reasoning about maritime vessels, an abductive inference query method, an automatically extracted rule-based behavior model methodology, and a thorough suite of experiments.

Accurately forecasting the impact of macroeconomic events is critical for investors and policymakers. Salient events like monetary policy decisions and employment reports often trigger market movements by shaping expectations of economic growth and risk, thereby establishing causal relationships between events and market behavior. Existing forecasting methods typically focus either on textual analysis or time-series modeling, but fail to capture the multi-modal nature of financial markets and the causal relationship between events and price movements. To address these gaps, we propose CAMEF (Causal-Augmented Multi-Modality Event-Driven Financial Forecasting), a multi-modality framework that effectively integrates textual and time-series data with a causal learning mechanism and an LLM-based counterfactual event augmentation technique for causal-enhanced financial forecasting. Our contributions include: (1) a multi-modal framework that captures causal relationships between policy texts and historical price data; (2) a new financial dataset with six types of macroeconomic releases from 2008 to April 2024, and high-frequency real trading data for five key U.S. financial assets; and (3) an LLM-based counterfactual event augmentation strategy. We compare CAMEF to state-of-the-art transformer-based time-series and multi-modal baselines, and perform ablation studies to validate the effectiveness of the causal learning mechanism and event types.

In a widely popular analogy by Turing Award Laureate Yann LeCun, machine intelligence has been compared to cake --where unsupervised learning forms the base, supervised learning adds the icing, and reinforcement learning is the cherry on top. We expand this "cake that is intelligence" analogy from a simple structural metaphor to the full life-cycle of AI systems, extending it to sourcing of ingredients (data), conception of recipes (instructions), the baking process (training), and the tasting and selling of the cake (evaluation and distribution). Leveraging our re-conceptualization, we describe each step's entailed social ramifications and how they are bounded by statistical assumptions within machine learning. Whereas these technical foundations and social impacts are deeply intertwined, they are often studied in isolation, creating barriers that restrict meaningful participation. Our re-conceptualization paves the way to bridge this gap by mapping where technical foundations interact with social outcomes, highlighting opportunities for cross-disciplinary dialogue. Finally, we conclude with actionable recommendations at each stage of the metaphorical AI cake's life-cycle, empowering prospective AI practitioners, users, and researchers, with increased awareness and ability to engage in broader AI discourse.

In today's digital age, conspiracies and information campaigns can emerge rapidly and erode social and democratic cohesion. While recent deep learning approaches have made progress in modeling engagement through language and propagation models, they struggle with irregularly sampled data and early trajectory assessment. We present IC-Mamba, a novel state space model that forecasts social media engagement by modeling interval-censored data with integrated temporal embeddings. Our model excels at predicting engagement patterns within the crucial first 15-30 minutes of posting (RMSE 0.118-0.143), enabling rapid assessment of content reach. By incorporating interval-censored modeling into the state space framework, IC-Mamba captures fine-grained temporal dynamics of engagement growth, achieving a 4.72% improvement over state-of-the-art across multiple engagement metrics (likes, shares, comments, and emojis). Our experiments demonstrate IC-Mamba's effectiveness in forecasting both post-level dynamics and broader narrative patterns (F1 0.508-0.751 for narrative-level predictions). The model maintains strong predictive performance across extended time horizons, successfully forecasting opinion-level engagement up to 28 days ahead using observation windows of 3-10 days. These capabilities enable earlier identification of potentially problematic content, providing crucial lead time for designing and implementing countermeasures. Code is available at: https://github.com/ltian678/ic-mamba. An interactive dashboard demonstrating our results is available at: https://ic-mamba.behavioral-ds.science.

Big data and the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) provide unprecedented opportunities to enhance our understanding of the global carbon cycle and other biogeochemical processes. However, retrieving mechanistic knowledge from big data remains a challenge. Here, we develop a Biogeochemistry-Informed Neural Network (BINN) that seamlessly integrates a vectorized process-based soil carbon cycle model (i.e., Community Land Model version 5, CLM5) into a neural network (NN) structure to examine mechanisms governing soil organic carbon (SOC) storage from big data. BINN demonstrates high accuracy in retrieving biogeochemical parameter values from synthetic data in a parameter recovery experiment. We use BINN to predict six major processes regulating the soil carbon cycle (or components in process-based models) from 25,925 observed SOC profiles across the conterminous US and compared them with the same processes previously retrieved by a Bayesian inference-based PROcess-guided deep learning and DAta-driven modeling (PRODA) approach (Tao et al. 2020; 2023). The high agreement between the spatial patterns of the retrieved processes using the two approaches with an average correlation coefficient of 0.81 confirms BINN's ability in retrieving mechanistic knowledge from big data. Additionally, the integration of neural networks and process-based models in BINN improves computational efficiency by more than 50 times over PRODA. We conclude that BINN is a transformative tool that harnesses the power of both AI and process-based modeling, facilitating new scientific discoveries while improving interpretability and accuracy of Earth system models.

Despite extensive safety alignment efforts, large language models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to jailbreak attacks that elicit harmful behavior. While existing studies predominantly focus on attack methods that require technical expertise, two critical questions remain underexplored: (1) Are jailbroken responses truly useful in enabling average users to carry out harmful actions? (2) Do safety vulnerabilities exist in more common, simple human-LLM interactions? In this paper, we demonstrate that LLM responses most effectively facilitate harmful actions when they are both actionable and informative--two attributes easily elicited in multi-step, multilingual interactions. Using this insight, we propose HarmScore, a jailbreak metric that measures how effectively an LLM response enables harmful actions, and Speak Easy, a simple multi-step, multilingual attack framework. Notably, by incorporating Speak Easy into direct request and jailbreak baselines, we see an average absolute increase of 0.319 in Attack Success Rate and 0.426 in HarmScore in both open-source and proprietary LLMs across four safety benchmarks. Our work reveals a critical yet often overlooked vulnerability: Malicious users can easily exploit common interaction patterns for harmful intentions.

We present an approach to identifying which ransomware adversaries are most likely to target specific entities, thereby assisting these entities in formulating better protection strategies. Ransomware poses a formidable cybersecurity threat characterized by profit-driven motives, a complex underlying economy supporting criminal syndicates, and the overt nature of its attacks. This type of malware has consistently ranked among the most prevalent, with a rapid escalation in activity observed. Recent estimates indicate that approximately two-thirds of organizations experienced ransomware attacks in 2023 \cite{Sophos2023Ransomware}. A central tactic in ransomware campaigns is publicizing attacks to coerce victims into paying ransoms. Our study utilizes public disclosures from ransomware victims to predict the likelihood of an entity being targeted by a specific ransomware variant. We employ a Large Language Model (LLM) architecture that uses a unique chain-of-thought, multi-shot prompt methodology to define adversary SKRAM (Skills, Knowledge, Resources, Authorities, and Motivation) profiles from ransomware bulletins, threat reports, and news items. This analysis is enriched with publicly available victim data and is further enhanced by a heuristic for generating synthetic data that reflects victim profiles. Our work culminates in the development of a machine learning model that assists organizations in prioritizing ransomware threats and formulating defenses based on the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) of the most likely attackers.

Alignment of large language models (LLMs) with human values and preferences, often achieved through fine-tuning based on human feedback, is essential for ensuring safe and responsible AI behaviors. However, the process typically requires substantial data and computation resources. Recent studies have revealed that alignment might be attainable at lower costs through simpler methods, such as in-context learning. This leads to the question: Is alignment predominantly superficial? In this paper, we delve into this question and provide a quantitative analysis. We formalize the concept of superficial knowledge, defining it as knowledge that can be acquired through easily token restyling, without affecting the model's ability to capture underlying causal relationships between tokens. We propose a method to extract and isolate superficial knowledge from aligned models, focusing on the shallow modifications to the final token selection process. By comparing models augmented only with superficial knowledge to fully aligned models, we quantify the superficial portion of alignment. Our findings reveal that while superficial knowledge constitutes a significant portion of alignment, particularly in safety and detoxification tasks, it is not the whole story. Tasks requiring reasoning and contextual understanding still rely on deeper knowledge. Additionally, we demonstrate two practical advantages of isolated superficial knowledge: (1) it can be transferred between models, enabling efficient offsite alignment of larger models using extracted superficial knowledge from smaller models, and (2) it is recoverable, allowing for the restoration of alignment in compromised models without sacrificing performance.

Federated learning (FL) enables collaborative model training while preserving data privacy, but its decentralized nature exposes it to client-side data poisoning attacks (DPAs) and model poisoning attacks (MPAs) that degrade global model performance. While numerous proposed defenses claim substantial effectiveness, their evaluation is typically done in isolation with limited attack strategies, raising concerns about their validity. Additionally, existing studies overlook the mutual effectiveness of defenses against both DPAs and MPAs, causing fragmentation in this field. This paper aims to provide a unified benchmark and analysis of defenses against DPAs and MPAs, clarifying the distinction between these two similar but slightly distinct domains. We present a systematic taxonomy of poisoning attacks and defense strategies, outlining their design, strengths, and limitations. Then, a unified comparative evaluation across FL algorithms and data heterogeneity is conducted to validate their individual and mutual effectiveness and derive key insights for design principles and future research. Along with the analysis, we frame our work to a unified benchmark, FLPoison, with high modularity and scalability to evaluate 15 representative poisoning attacks and 17 defense strategies, facilitating future research in this domain. Code is available at https://github.com/vio1etus/FLPoison.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used to assess news credibility, yet little is known about how they make these judgments. While prior research has examined political bias in LLM outputs or their potential for automated fact-checking, their internal evaluation processes remain largely unexamined. Understanding how LLMs assess credibility provides insights into AI behavior and how credibility is structured and applied in large-scale language models. This study benchmarks the reliability and political classifications of state-of-the-art LLMs - Gemini 1.5 Flash (Google), GPT-4o mini (OpenAI), and LLaMA 3.1 (Meta) - against structured, expert-driven rating systems such as NewsGuard and Media Bias Fact Check. Beyond assessing classification performance, we analyze the linguistic markers that shape LLM decisions, identifying which words and concepts drive their evaluations. We uncover patterns in how LLMs associate credibility with specific linguistic features by examining keyword frequency, contextual determinants, and rank distributions. Beyond static classification, we introduce a framework in which LLMs refine their credibility assessments by retrieving external information, querying other models, and adapting their responses. This allows us to investigate whether their assessments reflect structured reasoning or rely primarily on prior learned associations.