Despite the success of graph neural networks (GNNs) in various domains, they exhibit susceptibility to adversarial attacks. Understanding these vulnerabilities is crucial for developing robust and secure applications. In this paper, we investigate the impact of test time adversarial attacks through edge perturbations which involve both edge insertions and deletions. A novel explainability-based method is proposed to identify important nodes in the graph and perform edge perturbation between these nodes. The proposed method is tested for node classification with three different architectures and datasets. The results suggest that introducing edges between nodes of different classes has higher impact as compared to removing edges among nodes within the same class.

With the advancement of Internet of Things (IoT) technology, its applications span various sectors such as public, industrial, private and military. In particular, the drone sector has gained significant attention for both commercial and military purposes. As a result, there has been a surge in research focused on vulnerability analysis of drones. However, most security research to mitigate threats to IoT devices has focused primarily on networks, firmware and mobile applications. Of these, the use of fuzzing to analyse the security of firmware requires emulation of the firmware. However, when it comes to drone firmware, the industry lacks emulation and automated fuzzing tools. This is largely due to challenges such as limited input interfaces, firmware encryption and signatures. While it may be tempting to assume that existing emulators and automated analysers for IoT devices can be applied to drones, practical applications have proven otherwise. In this paper, we discuss the challenges of dynamically analysing drone firmware and propose potential solutions. In addition, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our methodology by applying it to DJI drones, which have the largest market share.

Decision-Focused Learning (DFL) is an emerging learning paradigm that tackles the task of training a machine learning (ML) model to predict missing parameters of an incomplete optimization problem, where the missing parameters are predicted. DFL trains an ML model in an end-to-end system, by integrating the prediction and optimization tasks, providing better alignment of the training and testing objectives. DFL has shown a lot of promise and holds the capacity to revolutionize decision-making in many real-world applications. However, very little is known about the performance of these models under adversarial attacks. We adopt ten unique DFL methods and benchmark their performance under two distinctly focused attacks adapted towards the Predict-then-Optimize problem setting. Our study proposes the hypothesis that the robustness of a model is highly correlated with its ability to find predictions that lead to optimal decisions without deviating from the ground-truth label. Furthermore, we provide insight into how to target the models that violate this condition and show how these models respond differently depending on the achieved optimality at the end of their training cycles.

A growing area of research investigates augmenting language models with tools (e.g., search engines, calculators) to overcome their shortcomings (e.g., missing or incorrect knowledge, incorrect logical inferences). Various few-shot tool-usage strategies have been proposed. However, there is no systematic and fair comparison across different strategies, or between these strategies and strong baselines that do not leverage tools. We conduct an extensive empirical analysis, finding that (1) across various datasets, example difficulty levels, and models, strong no-tool baselines are competitive to tool-assisted strategies, implying that effectively using tools with in-context demonstrations is a difficult unsolved problem; (2) for knowledge-retrieval tasks, strategies that *refine* incorrect outputs with tools outperform strategies that retrieve relevant information *ahead of* or *during generation*; (3) tool-assisted strategies are expensive in the number of tokens they require to work -- incurring additional costs by orders of magnitude -- which does not translate into significant improvement in performance. Overall, our findings suggest that few-shot tool integration is still an open challenge, emphasizing the need for comprehensive evaluations of future strategies to accurately assess their *benefits* and *costs*.

By now there is substantial evidence that deep learning models learn certain human-interpretable features as part of their internal representations of data. As having the right (or wrong) concepts is critical to trustworthy machine learning systems, it is natural to ask which inputs from the model's original training set were most important for learning a concept at a given layer. To answer this, we combine data attribution methods with methods for probing the concepts learned by a model. Training network and probe ensembles for two concept datasets on a range of network layers, we use the recently developed TRAK method for large-scale data attribution. We find some evidence for convergence, where removing the 10,000 top attributing images for a concept and retraining the model does not change the location of the concept in the network nor the probing sparsity of the concept. This suggests that rather than being highly dependent on a few specific examples, the features that inform the development of a concept are spread in a more diffuse manner across its exemplars, implying robustness in concept formation.

Every major technical invention resurfaces the dual-use dilemma -- the new technology has the potential to be used for good as well as for harm. Generative AI (GenAI) techniques, such as large language models (LLMs) and diffusion models, have shown remarkable capabilities (e.g., in-context learning, code-completion, and text-to-image generation and editing). However, GenAI can be used just as well by attackers to generate new attacks and increase the velocity and efficacy of existing attacks. This paper reports the findings of a workshop held at Google (co-organized by Stanford University and the University of Wisconsin-Madison) on the dual-use dilemma posed by GenAI. This paper is not meant to be comprehensive, but is rather an attempt to synthesize some of the interesting findings from the workshop. We discuss short-term and long-term goals for the community on this topic. We hope this paper provides both a launching point for a discussion on this important topic as well as interesting problems that the research community can work to address.

The vision of AI collaborators is a staple of mythology and science fiction, where artificial agents with special talents assist human partners and teams. In this dream, sophisticated AIs understand nuances of collaboration and human communication. The AI as collaborator dream is different from computer tools that augment human intelligence (IA) or intermediate human collaboration. Such tools have their roots in the 1960s and helped to drive an information technology revolution. They can be useful but they are not intelligent and do not collaborate as effectively as skilled people. With the increase of hybrid and remote work since the COVID pandemic, the benefits and requirements for better coordination, collaboration, and communication are becoming a hot topic in the workplace. Employers and workers face choices and trade-offs as they negotiate the options for working from home versus working at the office. Many factors such as the high costs of homes near employers are impeding a mass return to the office. Government advisory groups and leaders in AI have advocated for years that AIs should be transparent and effective collaborators. Nonetheless, robust AIs that collaborate like talented people remain out of reach. Are AI teammates part of a solution? How artificially intelligent (AI) could and should they be? This position paper reviews the arc of technology and public calls for human-machine teaming. It draws on earlier research in psychology and the social sciences about what human-like collaboration requires. This paper sets a context for a second science-driven paper that advocates a radical shift in technology and methodology for creating resilient, intelligent, and human-compatible AIs (Stefik & Price, 2023). The aspirational goal is that such AIs would learn, share what they learn, and collaborate to achieve high capabilities.

Abstract-- We formulate grasp learning as a neural field and present Neural Grasp Distance Fields (NGDF). Here, the input is a 6D pose of a robot end effector and output is a distance to a continuous manifold of valid grasps for an object. In contrast to current approaches that predict a set of discrete candidate grasps, the distance-based NGDF representation is easily interpreted as a cost, and minimizing this cost produces a successful grasp pose. This grasp distance cost can be incorporated directly into a trajectory optimizer for joint optimization with other costs such as trajectory smoothness and collision avoidance. Figure 1: (a) Existing grasp estimation methods produce discrete grasp We evaluate NGDF on joint grasp and motion planning in sets which do not represent the true continuous manifold of possible simulation and the real world, outperforming baselines by 63% grasps. This distance can be leveraged as a cost for optimization, facilitating joint grasp and motion planning. We present Neural Grasp Distance Fields (NGDF), which optimization results in a smooth, collision-free trajectory that model the continuous manifold of valid grasp poses as the reaches a valid grasp pose.

In this work, we propose an information-directed objective for infinite-horizon reinforcement learning (RL), called the occupancy information ratio (OIR), inspired by the information ratio objectives used in previous information-directed sampling schemes for multi-armed bandits and Markov decision processes as well as recent advances in general utility RL. The OIR, comprised of a ratio between the average cost of a policy and the entropy of its induced state occupancy measure, enjoys rich underlying structure and presents an objective to which scalable, model-free policy search methods naturally apply. Specifically, we show by leveraging connections between quasiconcave optimization and the linear programming theory for Markov decision processes that the OIR problem can be transformed and solved via concave programming methods when the underlying model is known. Since model knowledge is typically lacking in practice, we lay the foundations for model-free OIR policy search methods by establishing a corresponding policy gradient theorem. Building on this result, we subsequently derive REINFORCE- and actor-critic-style algorithms for solving the OIR problem in policy parameter space. Crucially, exploiting the powerful hidden quasiconcavity property implied by the concave programming transformation of the OIR problem, we establish finite-time convergence of the REINFORCE-style scheme to global optimality and asymptotic convergence of the actor-critic-style scheme to (near) global optimality under suitable conditions. Finally, we experimentally illustrate the utility of OIR-based methods over vanilla methods in sparse-reward settings, supporting the OIR as an alternative to existing RL objectives.

The Times said OpenAI and Microsoft are advancing their technology through the "unlawful use of The Times's work to create artificial intelligence products that compete with it" and "threatens The Times's ability to provide that service". Through their AI chatbots, the companies "seek to free-ride on The Times's massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment", the lawsuit said. The Times, one of the most respected news organisations in the United States, is seeking damages as well as an order that the companies stop using its content – and destroy data already harvested. While no sum is specifically requested, the Times alleged that the infringement could have cost "billions of dollars in statutory and actual damages". With the suit, The New York Times chose a more confrontational approach to the sudden rise of AI chatbots, in contrast to other media groups, such as Germany's Axel Springer or The Associated Press, which have struck content deals with OpenAI. Microsoft, the world's second biggest company by market capitalisation, is a major investor in OpenAI and swiftly implemented the powers of AI in its own products after the release of ChatGPT last year.