Time series generation models are crucial for applications like data augmentation and privacy preservation. Most existing time series generation models are typically designed to generate data from one specified domain. While leveraging data from other domain for better generalization is proved to work in other application areas, this approach remains challenging for time series modeling due to the large divergence in patterns among different real world time series categories. In this paper, we propose a multi-domain time series diffusion model with domain prompts, named TimeDP. In TimeDP, we utilize a time series semantic prototype module which defines time series prototypes to represent time series basis, each prototype vector serving as "word" representing some elementary time series feature. A prototype assignment module is applied to extract the extract domain specific prototype weights, for learning domain prompts as generation condition. During sampling, we extract "domain prompt" with few-shot samples from the target domain and use the domain prompts as condition to generate time series samples. Experiments demonstrate that our method outperforms baselines to provide the state-of-the-art in-domain generation quality and strong unseen domain generation capability.

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant capability in code generation, drawing increasing attention to the evaluation of the quality and safety of their outputs. However, research on bias in code generation remains limited. Existing studies typically assess bias by applying malicious prompts or reapply tasks and dataset for discriminative models. Given that LLMs are often aligned with human values and that prior datasets are not fully optimized for code-related tasks, there is a pressing need for benchmarks specifically designed for evaluating code models. In this study, we introduce FairCode, a novel benchmark for evaluating bias in code generation. FairCode comprises two tasks: function implementation and test case generation, each evaluating social bias through diverse scenarios. Additionally, we propose a new metric, FairScore, to assess model performance on this benchmark. We conduct experiments on widely used LLMs and provide a comprehensive analysis of the results. The findings reveal that all tested LLMs exhibit bias. The code is available at https://github.com/YongkDu/FairCode.

We study strategic location choice by customers and sellers, termed the Bakers and Millers Game in the literature. In our generalized setting, each miller can freely choose any location for setting up a mill, while each baker is restricted in the choice of location for setting up a bakery. For optimal bargaining power, a baker would like to select a location with many millers to buy flour from and with little competition from other bakers. Likewise, a miller aims for a location with many bakers and few competing millers. Thus, both types of agents choose locations to optimize the ratio of agents of opposite type divided by agents of the same type at their chosen location. Originally raised in the context of Fractional Hedonic Games, the Bakers and Millers Game has applications that range from commerce to product design. We study the impact of location restrictions on the properties of the game. While pure Nash equilibria trivially exist in the setting without location restrictions, we show via a sophisticated, efficient algorithm that even the more challenging restricted setting admits equilibria. Moreover, the computed equilibrium approximates the optimal social welfare by a factor of at most $2\left(\frac{e}{e-1}\right)$. Furthermore, we give tight bounds on the price of anarchy/stability. On the conceptual side, the location choice feature adds a new layer to the standard setting of Hedonic Games, in the sense that agents that select the same location form a coalition. This allows to naturally restrict the possible coalitions that can be formed. With this, our model generalizes simple symmetric Fractional Hedonic Games on complete bipartite valuation graphs and also Hedonic Diversity Games with utilities single-peaked at 0. We believe that this generalization is also a very interesting direction for other types of Hedonic Games.

Explainable AI (XAI) provides methods to understand non-interpretable machine learning models. However, we have little knowledge about what legal experts expect from these explanations, including their legal compliance with, and value against European Union legislation. To close this gap, we present the Explanation Dialogues, an expert focus study to uncover the expectations, reasoning, and understanding of legal experts and practitioners towards XAI, with a specific focus on the European General Data Protection Regulation. The study consists of an online questionnaire and follow-up interviews, and is centered around a use-case in the credit domain. We extract both a set of hierarchical and interconnected codes using grounded theory, and present the standpoints of the participating experts towards XAI. We find that the presented explanations are hard to understand and lack information, and discuss issues that can arise from the different interests of the data controller and subject. Finally, we present a set of recommendations for developers of XAI methods, and indications of legal areas of discussion. Among others, recommendations address the presentation, choice, and content of an explanation, technical risks as well as the end-user, while we provide legal pointers to the contestability of explanations, transparency thresholds, intellectual property rights as well as the relationship between involved parties.

The new era of large-scale data collection and analysis presents an opportunity for diagnosing and understanding the causes of health inequities. In this study, we describe a framework for systematically analyzing health disparities using causal inference. The framework is illustrated by investigating racial and ethnic disparities in intensive care unit (ICU) outcome between majority and minority groups in Australia (Indigenous vs. Non-Indigenous) and the United States (African-American vs. White). We demonstrate that commonly used statistical measures for quantifying inequity are insufficient, and focus on attributing the observed disparity to the causal mechanisms that generate it. We find that minority patients are younger at admission, have worse chronic health, are more likely to be admitted for urgent and non-elective reasons, and have higher illness severity. At the same time, however, we find a protective direct effect of belonging to a minority group, with minority patients showing improved survival compared to their majority counterparts, with all other variables kept equal. We demonstrate that this protective effect is related to the increased probability of being admitted to ICU, with minority patients having an increased risk of ICU admission. We also find that minority patients, while showing improved survival, are more likely to be readmitted to ICU. Thus, due to worse access to primary health care, minority patients are more likely to end up in ICU for preventable conditions, causing a reduction in the mortality rates and creating an effect that appears to be protective. Since the baseline risk of ICU admission may serve as proxy for lack of access to primary care, we developed the Indigenous Intensive Care Equity (IICE) Radar, a monitoring system for tracking the over-utilization of ICU resources by the Indigenous population of Australia across geographical areas.

Expanding the frame of evaluation to include other parties, as well as the ecosystem in which the system is deployed, leads us to a multistakeholder view of recommender system evaluation as defined in [2]: "A multistakeholder evaluation is one in which the quality of recommendations is assessed across multiple groups of stakeholders." In this article, we provide (i) an overview of the types of recommendation stakeholders that can be considered in conducting such evaluations, (ii) a discussion of the considerations and values that enter into developing measures that capture outcomes of interest for a diversity of stakeholders, (iii) an outline of a methodology for developing and applying multistakeholder evaluation, and (iv) three examples of different multistakeholder scenarios including derivations of evaluation metrics for different stakeholder groups in these different scenarios. The variety of possible stakeholders we identified that are part of the general recommendation ecosystem is suggested in Figure 1 and defined here, using the terminology from [1, 2]: Recommendation consumers are the traditional recommender system users to whom recommendations are delivered and to which typical forms of recommender system evaluation are oriented. Item providers form the general class of individuals or entities who create or otherwise stand behind the items being recommended.

Context. Developing secure and reliable software remains a key challenge in software engineering (SE). The ever-evolving technological landscape offers both opportunities and threats, creating a dynamic space where chaos and order compete. Secure software engineering (SSE) must continuously address vulnerabilities that endanger software systems and carry broader socio-economic risks, such as compromising critical national infrastructure and causing significant financial losses. Researchers and practitioners have explored methodologies like Static Application Security Testing Tools (SASTTs) and artificial intelligence (AI) approaches, including machine learning (ML) and large language models (LLMs), to detect and mitigate these vulnerabilities. Each method has unique strengths and limitations. Aim. This thesis seeks to bring order to the chaos in SSE by addressing domain-specific differences that impact AI accuracy. Methodology. The research employs a mix of empirical strategies, such as evaluating effort-aware metrics, analyzing SASTTs, conducting method-level analysis, and leveraging evidence-based techniques like systematic dataset reviews. These approaches help characterize vulnerability prediction datasets. Results. Key findings include limitations in static analysis tools for identifying vulnerabilities, gaps in SASTT coverage of vulnerability types, weak relationships among vulnerability severity scores, improved defect prediction accuracy using just-in-time modeling, and threats posed by untouched methods. Conclusions. This thesis highlights the complexity of SSE and the importance of contextual knowledge in improving AI-driven vulnerability and defect prediction. The comprehensive analysis advances effective prediction models, benefiting both researchers and practitioners.

The pre-training and fine-tuning paradigm has revolutionized satellite remote sensing applications. However, this approach remains largely underexplored for airborne laser scanning (ALS), an important technology for applications such as forest management and urban planning. In this study, we address this gap by constructing a large-scale ALS point cloud dataset and evaluating its impact on downstream applications. Our dataset comprises ALS point clouds collected across the contiguous United States, provided by the United States Geological Survey's 3D Elevation Program. To ensure efficient data collection while capturing diverse land cover and terrain types, we introduce a geospatial sampling method that selects point cloud tiles based on land cover maps and digital elevation models. As a baseline self-supervised learning model, we adopt BEV-MAE, a state-of-the-art masked autoencoder for 3D outdoor point clouds, and pre-train it on the constructed dataset. The pre-trained models are subsequently fine-tuned for downstream tasks, including tree species classification, terrain scene recognition, and point cloud semantic segmentation. Our results show that the pre-trained models significantly outperform their scratch counterparts across all downstream tasks, demonstrating the transferability of the representations learned from the proposed dataset. Furthermore, we observe that scaling the dataset using our geospatial sampling method consistently enhances performance, whereas pre-training on datasets constructed with random sampling fails to achieve similar improvements. These findings highlight the utility of the constructed dataset and the effectiveness of our sampling strategy in the pre-training and fine-tuning paradigm. The source code and pre-trained models will be made publicly available at \url{https://github.com/martianxiu/ALS_pretraining}.

The UAV-VLA (Visual-Language-Action) system is a tool designed to facilitate communication with aerial robots. By integrating satellite imagery processing with the Visual Language Model (VLM) and the powerful capabilities of GPT, UAV-VLA enables users to generate general flight paths-and-action plans through simple text requests. This system leverages the rich contextual information provided by satellite images, allowing for enhanced decision-making and mission planning. The combination of visual analysis by VLM and natural language processing by GPT can provide the user with the path-and-action set, making aerial operations more efficient and accessible. The newly developed method showed the difference in the length of the created trajectory in 22% and the mean error in finding the objects of interest on a map in 34.22 m by Euclidean distance in the K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) approach.

The rapid development of large language models (LLMs) and large vision models (LVMs) have propelled the evolution of multi-modal AI systems, which have demonstrated the remarkable potential for industrial applications by emulating human-like cognition. However, they also pose significant ethical challenges, including amplifying harmful content and reinforcing societal biases. For instance, biases in some industrial image generation models highlighted the urgent need for robust fairness assessments. Most existing evaluation frameworks focus on the comprehensiveness of various aspects of the models, but they exhibit critical limitations, including insufficient attention to content generation alignment and social bias-sensitive domains. More importantly, their reliance on pixel-detection techniques is prone to inaccuracies. To address these issues, this paper presents INFELM, an in-depth fairness evaluation on widely-used text-to-image models. Our key contributions are: (1) an advanced skintone classifier incorporating facial topology and refined skin pixel representation to enhance classification precision by at least 16.04%, (2) a bias-sensitive content alignment measurement for understanding societal impacts, (3) a generalizable representation bias evaluation for diverse demographic groups, and (4) extensive experiments analyzing large-scale text-to-image model outputs across six social-bias-sensitive domains. We find that existing models in the study generally do not meet the empirical fairness criteria, and representation bias is generally more pronounced than alignment errors. INFELM establishes a robust benchmark for fairness assessment, supporting the development of multi-modal AI systems that align with ethical and human-centric principles.