AI is anticipated to enhance human decision-making in high-stakes domains like aviation, but adoption is often hindered by challenges such as inappropriate reliance and poor alignment with users' decision-making. Recent research suggests that a core underlying issue is the recommendation-centric design of many AI systems, i.e., they give end-to-end recommendations and ignore the rest of the decision-making process. Alternative support paradigms are rare, and it remains unclear how the few that do exist compare to recommendation-centric support. In this work, we aimed to empirically compare recommendation-centric support to an alternative paradigm, continuous support, in the context of diversions in aviation. We conducted a mixed-methods study with 32 professional pilots in a realistic setting. To ensure the quality of our study scenarios, we conducted a focus group with four additional pilots prior to the study. We found that continuous support can support pilots' decision-making in a forward direction, allowing them to think more beyond the limits of the system and make faster decisions when combined with recommendations, though the forward support can be disrupted. Participants' statements further suggest a shift in design goal away from providing recommendations, to supporting quick information gathering. Our results show ways to design more helpful and effective AI decision support that goes beyond end-to-end recommendations.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have seen a surge in usage across a multitude of industries, such as aerial photography, military operations, agriculture, mapping, and surveying. The advantages of UAVs over traditional manned aircraft are numerous, including cost-effectiveness, enhanced safety, and superior flexibility. However, the autonomous operation of UAVs, particularly their ability to land on moving platforms like ships, poses a crucial challenge. This capability is of significant importance for industries that depend on maritime transportation or offshore operations. A primary challenge in this context is the estimation of the UAV's relative pose with respect to the ship, which is vital for precise control of the UAV's movements and ensuring a safe landing. Conventionally, the relative pose has been determined using the Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) Global Positioning System (GPS). To receive RTK-GPS, a communication link between the ship and the UAV must be maintained at all times, typically via radio.

Foundation models are increasingly ubiquitous in our daily lives, used in everyday tasks such as text-image searches, interactions with chatbots, and content generation. As use increases, so does concern over the disparities in performance and fairness of these models for different people in different parts of the world. To assess these growing regional disparities, we present World Wide Dishes, a mixed text and image dataset consisting of 765 dishes, with dish names collected in 131 local languages. World Wide Dishes has been collected purely through human contribution and decentralised means, by creating a website widely distributed through social networks. Using the dataset, we demonstrate a novel means of operationalising capability and representational biases in foundation models such as language models and text-to-image generative models. We enrich these studies with a pilot community review to understand, from a first-person perspective, how these models generate images for people in five African countries and the United States. We find that these models generally do not produce quality text and image outputs of dishes specific to different regions. This is true even for the US, which is typically considered to be more well-resourced in training data - though the generation of US dishes does outperform that of the investigated African countries. The models demonstrate a propensity to produce outputs that are inaccurate as well as culturally misrepresentative, flattening, and insensitive. These failures in capability and representational bias have the potential to further reinforce stereotypes and disproportionately contribute to erasure based on region. The dataset and code are available at https://github.com/oxai/world-wide-dishes/.

Opinion pieces (or op-eds) can provide valuable perspectives, but they often represent only one side of a story, which can make readers susceptible to confirmation bias and echo chambers. Exposure to different perspectives can help readers overcome these obstacles and form more robust, nuanced views on important societal issues. We designed ArguMentor, a human-AI collaboration system that highlights claims in opinion pieces, identifies counter-arguments for them using a LLM, and generates a context-based summary of based on current events. It further enhances user understanding through additional features like a Q&A bot (that answers user questions pertaining to the text), DebateMe (an agent that users can argue any side of the piece with) and highlighting (where users can highlight a word or passage to get its definition or context). Our evaluation shows that participants can generate more arguments and counter-arguments and have, on average, have more moderate views after engaging with the system.

A cautious interpretation of AI regulations and policy in the EU and the USA place explainability as a central deliverable of compliant AI systems. However, from a technical perspective, explainable AI (XAI) remains an elusive and complex target where even state of the art methods often reach erroneous, misleading, and incomplete explanations. "Explainability" has multiple meanings which are often used interchangeably, and there are an even greater number of XAI methods - none of which presents a clear edge. Indeed, there are multiple failure modes for each XAI method, which require application-specific development and continuous evaluation. In this paper, we analyze legislative and policy developments in the United States and the European Union, such as the Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, the AI Act, the AI Liability Directive, and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) from a right to explanation perspective. We argue that these AI regulations and current market conditions threaten effective AI governance and safety because the objective of trustworthy, accountable, and transparent AI is intrinsically linked to the questionable ability of AI operators to provide meaningful explanations. Unless governments explicitly tackle the issue of explainability through clear legislative and policy statements that take into account technical realities, AI governance risks becoming a vacuous "box-ticking" exercise where scientific standards are replaced with legalistic thresholds, providing only a false sense of security in XAI.

Conversational Large Language Models are trained to refuse to answer harmful questions. However, emergent jailbreaking techniques can still elicit unsafe outputs, presenting an ongoing challenge for model alignment. To better understand how different jailbreak types circumvent safeguards, this paper analyses model activations on different jailbreak inputs. We find that it is possible to extract a jailbreak vector from a single class of jailbreaks that works to mitigate jailbreak effectiveness from other classes. This may indicate that different kinds of effective jailbreaks operate via similar internal mechanisms. We investigate a potential common mechanism of harmfulness feature suppression, and provide evidence for its existence by looking at the harmfulness vector component. These findings offer actionable insights for developing more robust jailbreak countermeasures and lay the groundwork for a deeper, mechanistic understanding of jailbreak dynamics in language models.

The Lucas critique emphasizes the importance of considering the impact of policy changes on the expectations of micro-level agents in macroeconomic policymaking. However, the inherently self-interested nature of large-scale micro-agents, who pursue long-term benefits, complicates the formulation of optimal macroeconomic policies. This paper proposes a novel general framework named Dynamic Stackelberg Mean Field Games (Dynamic SMFG) to model such policymaking within sequential decision-making processes, with the government as the leader and households as dynamic followers. Dynamic SMFGs capture the dynamic interactions among large-scale households and their response to macroeconomic policy changes. To solve dynamic SMFGs, we propose the Stackelberg Mean Field Reinforcement Learning (SMFRL) algorithm, which leverages the population distribution of followers to represent high-dimensional joint state and action spaces. In experiments, our method surpasses macroeconomic policies in the real world, existing AI-based and economic methods. It allows the leader to approach the social optimum with the highest performance, while large-scale followers converge toward their best response to the leader's policy. Besides, we demonstrate that our approach retains effectiveness even when some households do not adopt the SMFG policy. In summary, this paper contributes to the field of AI for economics by offering an effective tool for modeling and solving macroeconomic policy-making issues.

With an evolutionary approach, the basis of morality can be explained as adaptations to problems of cooperation. With 'evolution' taken in a broad sense, evolving AIs that satisfy the conditions for evolution to apply will be subject to the same cooperative evolutionary pressure as biological entities. Here the adaptiveness of increased cooperation as material safety and wealth increase is discussed -- for humans, for other societies, and for AIs. Diminishing beneficial returns from increased access to material resources also suggests the possibility that, on the whole, there will be no incentive to for instance colonize entire galaxies, thus providing a possible explanation of the Fermi paradox, wondering where everybody is. It is further argued that old societies could engender, give way to, super-AIs, since it is likely that super-AIs are feasible, and fitter. Closing is an aside on effective ways for morals and goals to affect life and society, emphasizing environments, cultures, and laws, and exemplified by how to eat. Appended are an algorithm for colonizing for example a galaxy quickly, models of the evolution of cooperation and fairness under diminishing returns, and software for simulating signaling development. It is also noted that there can be no exponential colonization or reproduction, for mathematical reasons, as each entity takes up a certain amount of space.

Recent advancements in structure-based drug design (SBDD) have significantly enhanced the efficiency and precision of drug discovery by generating molecules tailored to bind specific protein pockets. Despite these technological strides, their practical application in real-world drug development remains challenging due to the complexities of synthesizing and testing these molecules. The reliability of the Vina docking score, the current standard for assessing binding abilities, is increasingly questioned due to its susceptibility to overfitting. To address these limitations, we propose a comprehensive evaluation framework that includes assessing the similarity of generated molecules to known active compounds, introducing a virtual screening-based metric for practical deployment capabilities, and re-evaluating binding affinity more rigorously. Our experiments reveal that while current SBDD models achieve high Vina scores, they fall short in practical usability metrics, highlighting a significant gap between theoretical predictions and real-world applicability. Our proposed metrics and dataset aim to bridge this gap, enhancing the practical applicability of future SBDD models and aligning them more closely with the needs of pharmaceutical research and development.

Although Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant capabilities in executing complex tasks in a zero-shot manner, they are susceptible to jailbreak attacks and can be manipulated to produce harmful outputs. Recently, a growing body of research has categorized jailbreak attacks into token-level and prompt-level attacks. However, previous work primarily overlooks the diverse key factors of jailbreak attacks, with most studies concentrating on LLM vulnerabilities and lacking exploration of defense-enhanced LLMs. To address these issues, we evaluate the impact of various attack settings on LLM performance and provide a baseline benchmark for jailbreak attacks, encouraging the adoption of a standardized evaluation framework. Specifically, we evaluate the eight key factors of implementing jailbreak attacks on LLMs from both target-level and attack-level perspectives. We further conduct seven representative jailbreak attacks on six defense methods across two widely used datasets, encompassing approximately 320 experiments with about 50,000 GPU hours on A800-80G. Our experimental results highlight the need for standardized benchmarking to evaluate these attacks on defense-enhanced LLMs.