The top priority of a Housing and Homelessness System of Care (HHSC) is to connect people experiencing homelessness to supportive housing. An HHSC typically consists of many agencies serving the same population. Information technology platforms differ in type and quality between agencies, so their data are usually isolated from one agency to another. Larger agencies may have sufficient data to train and test artificial intelligence (AI) tools but smaller agencies typically do not. To address this gap, we introduce a Federated Learning (FL) approach enabling all agencies to train a predictive model collaboratively without sharing their sensitive data. We demonstrate how FL can be used within an HHSC to provide all agencies equitable access to quality AI and further assist human decision-makers in the allocation of resources within HHSC. This is achieved while preserving the privacy of the people within the data by not sharing identifying information between agencies without their consent. Our experimental results using real-world HHSC data from Calgary, Alberta, demonstrate that our FL approach offers comparable performance with the idealized scenario of training the predictive model with data fully shared and linked between agencies.

What has long been asserted by big tech skeptics is now the official position of the US district court for DC. Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google broke antitrust law by spending tens of billions annually to secure default search engine status across major web browsers, including Safari and Firefox. This coordinated campaign resulted in Google securing 90% of the global search market, despite its engine increasingly answering queries with spam pages, AI gibberish and product placements. The court has yet to determine Google's penalties. But this opinion marks a turning point in the ongoing fight to regulate Silicon Valley.

AI experts say the image of Kamala Harris' rally does show hallmarks of being heavily edited -- though this was probably done using basic filters rather than AI. Donald Trump caused a furor over the weekend after claiming the picture had been'A.I.'d' to boost the size of Harris' crowd in Michigan and exaggerate her popularity. The former president and some of his online supports pointed to the unusual lack of crowd reflection on the plane's turbine as evidence the image had been doctored. They concluded there was only a four percent chance it has been warped using the software. But it's possible the photo had been heavily filtered and edited, they said. And the plane's curved reflective surface also creates an illusion where objects above and below the surface are most visible and dominate the reflection, they added.

In this blog post, Anna Nadibaidze explores the main themes found across common visuals of AI in the military domain. Inspired by the work and mission of Better Images of AI, she argues for the need to discuss and find alternatives to images of humanoid'killer robots'. Anna holds a PhD in Political Science from the University of Southern Denmark (SDU) and is a researcher for the AutoNorms project, based at SDU. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into the military domain, especially weapon systems and the process of using force, has been the topic of international academic, policy, and regulatory debates for more than a decade. The visual aspect of these discussions, however, has not been analysed in depth. This is both puzzling, considering the role that images play in shaping parts of the discourses on AI in warfare, and potentially problematic, given that many of these visuals, as I explore below, misrepresent major issues at stake in the debate.

Beliefs serve as the foundation for human cognition and decision-making. They guide individuals in deriving meaning from their lives, shaping their behaviors, and forming social connections. Therefore, a model that encapsulates beliefs and their interrelationships is crucial for quantitatively studying the influence of beliefs on our actions. Despite its importance, research on the interplay between human beliefs has often been limited to a small set of beliefs pertaining to specific issues, with a heavy reliance on surveys or experiments. Here, we propose a method for extracting nuanced relations between thousands of beliefs by leveraging large-scale user participation data from an online debate platform and mapping these beliefs to an embedding space using a fine-tuned large language model (LLM). This belief embedding space effectively encapsulates the interconnectedness of diverse beliefs as well as polarization across various social issues. We discover that the positions within this belief space predict new beliefs of individuals. Furthermore, we find that the relative distance between one's existing beliefs and new beliefs can serve as a quantitative estimate of cognitive dissonance, allowing us to predict new beliefs. Our study highlights how modern LLMs, when combined with collective online records of human beliefs, can offer insights into the fundamental principles that govern human belief formation and decision-making processes.

Data-driven storytelling is a powerful method for conveying insights by combining narrative techniques with visualizations and text. These stories integrate visual aids, such as highlighted bars and lines in charts, along with textual annotations explaining insights. However, creating such stories requires a deep understanding of the data and meticulous narrative planning, often necessitating human intervention, which can be time-consuming and mentally taxing. While Large Language Models (LLMs) excel in various NLP tasks, their ability to generate coherent and comprehensive data stories remains underexplored. In this work, we introduce a novel task for data story generation and a benchmark containing 1,449 stories from diverse sources. To address the challenges of crafting coherent data stories, we propose a multiagent framework employing two LLM agents designed to replicate the human storytelling process: one for understanding and describing the data (Reflection), generating the outline, and narration, and another for verification at each intermediary step. While our agentic framework generally outperforms non-agentic counterparts in both model-based and human evaluations, the results also reveal unique challenges in data story generation.

End-to-end interpretation is currently the prevailing paradigm for remote sensing fine-grained ship classification (RS-FGSC) task. However, its inference process is uninterpretable, leading to criticism as a black box model. To address this issue, we propose a large vision-language model (LVLM) named IFShip for interpretable fine-grained ship classification. Unlike traditional methods, IFShip excels in interpretability by accurately conveying the reasoning process of FGSC in natural language. Specifically, we first design a domain knowledge-enhanced Chain-of-Thought (COT) prompt generation mechanism. This mechanism is used to semi-automatically construct a task-specific instruction-following dataset named TITANIC-FGS, which emulates human-like logical decision-making. We then train the IFShip model using task instructions tuned with the TITANIC-FGS dataset. Building on IFShip, we develop an FGSC visual chatbot that redefines the FGSC problem as a step-by-step reasoning task and conveys the reasoning process in natural language. Experimental results reveal that the proposed method surpasses state-of-the-art FGSC algorithms in both classification interpretability and accuracy. Moreover, compared to LVLMs like LLaVA and MiniGPT-4, our approach demonstrates superior expertise in the FGSC task. It provides an accurate chain of reasoning when fine-grained ship types are recognizable to the human eye and offers interpretable explanations when they are not.

Foundational Models (FMs) are gaining increasing attention in the biomedical AI ecosystem due to their ability to represent and contextualize multimodal biomedical data. These capabilities make FMs a valuable tool for a variety of tasks, including biomedical reasoning, hypothesis generation, and interpreting complex imaging data. In this review paper, we address the unique challenges associated with establishing an ethical and trustworthy biomedical AI ecosystem, with a particular focus on the development of FMs and their downstream applications. We explore strategies that can be implemented throughout the biomedical AI pipeline to effectively tackle these challenges, ensuring that these FMs are translated responsibly into clinical and translational settings. Additionally, we emphasize the importance of key stewardship and co-design principles that not only ensure robust regulation but also guarantee that the interests of all stakeholders, especially those involved in or affected by these clinical and translational applications are adequately represented. We aim to empower the biomedical AI community to harness these models responsibly and effectively. As we navigate this exciting frontier, our collective commitment to ethical stewardship, co-design, and responsible translation will be instrumental in ensuring that the evolution of FMs truly enhances patient care and medical decision making, ultimately leading to a more equitable and trustworthy biomedical AI ecosystem.

The success of Large Language Models (LLMs) in multicultural environments hinges on their ability to understand users' diverse cultural backgrounds. We measure this capability by having an LLM simulate human profiles representing various nationalities within the scope of a questionnaire-style psychological experiment. Specifically, we employ GPT-3.5 to reproduce reactions to persuasive news articles of 7,286 participants from 15 countries; comparing the results with a dataset of real participants sharing the same demographic traits. Our analysis shows that specifying a person's country of residence improves GPT-3.5's alignment with their responses. In contrast, using native language prompting introduces shifts that significantly reduce overall alignment, with some languages particularly impairing performance. These findings suggest that while direct nationality information enhances the model's cultural adaptability, native language cues do not reliably improve simulation fidelity and can detract from the model's effectiveness.

The deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) in content generation raises significant safety concerns, particularly regarding the transparency and interpretability of content evaluations. Current methods, primarily focused on binary safety classifications, lack mechanisms for detailed critique, limiting their utility for model improvement and user trust. To address these limitations, we introduce SAFETY-J, a bilingual generative safety evaluator for English and Chinese with critique-based judgment. SAFETY-J utilizes a robust training dataset that includes diverse dialogues and augmented query-response pairs to assess safety across various scenarios comprehensively. We establish an automated meta-evaluation benchmark that objectively assesses the quality of critiques with minimal human intervention, facilitating scalable and continuous improvement. Additionally, SAFETY-J employs an iterative preference learning technique to dynamically refine safety assessments based on meta-evaluations and critiques. Our evaluations demonstrate that SAFETY-J provides more nuanced and accurate safety evaluations, thereby enhancing both critique quality and predictive reliability in complex content scenarios. To facilitate further research and application, we open-source SAFETY-J's training protocols, datasets, and code at https://github.com/GAIR-NLP/Safety-J.