The abundance of cyber-physical components in modern day power grid with their diverse hardware and software vulnerabilities has made it difficult to protect them from advanced persistent threats (APTs). An attack graph depicting the propagation of potential cyber-attack sequences from the initial access point to the end objective is vital to identify critical weaknesses of any cyber-physical system. A cyber security personnel can accordingly plan preventive mitigation measures for the identified weaknesses addressing the cyber-attack sequences. However, limitations on available cybersecurity budget restrict the choice of mitigation measures. We address this aspect through our framework, which solves the following problem: given potential cyber-attack sequences for a cyber-physical component in the power grid, find the optimal manner to allocate an available budget to implement necessary preventive mitigation measures. We formulate the problem as a mixed integer linear program (MILP) to identify the optimal budget partition and set of mitigation measures which minimize the vulnerability of cyber-physical components to potential attack sequences. We assume that the allocation of budget affects the efficacy of the mitigation measures. We show how altering the budget allocation for tasks such as asset management, cybersecurity infrastructure improvement, incident response planning and employee training affects the choice of the optimal set of preventive mitigation measures and modifies the associated cybersecurity risk. The proposed framework can be used by cyber policymakers and system owners to allocate optimal budgets for various tasks required to improve the overall security of a cyber-physical system.

Human annotations are vital to supervised learning, yet annotators often disagree on the correct label, especially as annotation tasks increase in complexity. A strategy to improve label quality is to ask multiple annotators to label the same item and aggregate their labels. Many aggregation models have been proposed for categorical or numerical annotation tasks, but far less work has considered more complex annotation tasks involving open-ended, multivariate, or structured responses. While a variety of bespoke models have been proposed for specific tasks, our work is the first to introduce aggregation methods that generalize across many diverse complex tasks, including sequence labeling, translation, syntactic parsing, ranking, bounding boxes, and keypoints. This generality is achieved by devising a task-agnostic method to model distances between labels rather than the labels themselves. This article extends our prior work with investigation of three new research questions. First, how do complex annotation properties impact aggregation accuracy? Second, how should a task owner navigate the many modeling choices to maximize aggregation accuracy? Finally, what diagnoses can verify that aggregation models are specified correctly for the given data? To understand how various factors impact accuracy and to inform model selection, we conduct simulation studies and experiments on real, complex datasets. Regarding testing, we introduce unit tests for aggregation models and present a suite of such tests to ensure that a given model is not mis-specified and exhibits expected behavior. Beyond investigating these research questions above, we discuss the foundational concept of annotation complexity, present a new aggregation model as a bridge between traditional models and our own, and contribute a new semi-supervised learning method for complex label aggregation that outperforms prior work.

With fully automated driving systems (ADS; SAE level 4) ride-hailing services expanding in the US, we are now approaching an inflection point, where the process of retrospectively evaluating ADS safety impact can start to yield statistically credible conclusions. An ADS safety impact measurement requires a comparison to a "benchmark" crash rate. This study aims to address, update, and extend the existing literature by leveraging police-reported crashes to generate human crash rates for multiple geographic areas with current ADS deployments. All of the data leveraged is publicly accessible, and the benchmark determination methodology is intended to be repeatable and transparent. Generating a benchmark that is comparable to ADS crash data is associated with certain challenges, including data selection, handling underreporting and reporting thresholds, identifying the population of drivers and vehicles to compare against, choosing an appropriate severity level to assess, and matching crash and mileage exposure data. Consequently, we identify essential steps when generating benchmarks, and present our analyses amongst a backdrop of existing ADS benchmark literature. One analysis presented is the usage of established underreporting correction methodology to publicly available human driver police-reported data to improve comparability to publicly available ADS crash data. We also identify important dependencies in controlling for geographic region, road type, and vehicle type, and show how failing to control for these features can bias results. This body of work aims to contribute to the ability of the community - researchers, regulators, industry, and experts - to reach consensus on how to estimate accurate benchmarks.

Warning: This paper contains examples of the language that some people may find offensive. Detecting and reducing hateful, abusive, offensive comments is a critical and challenging task on social media. Moreover, few studies aim to mitigate the intensity of hate speech. While studies have shown that context-level semantics are crucial for detecting hateful comments, most of this research focuses on English due to the ample datasets available. In contrast, low-resource languages, like Indian languages, remain under-researched because of limited datasets. Contrary to hate speech detection, hate intensity reduction remains unexplored in high-resource and low-resource languages. In this paper, we propose a novel end-to-end model, HCDIR, for Hate Context Detection, and Hate Intensity Reduction in social media posts. First, we fine-tuned several pre-trained language models to detect hateful comments to ascertain the best-performing hateful comments detection model. Then, we identified the contextual hateful words. Identification of such hateful words is justified through the state-of-the-art explainable learning model, i.e., Integrated Gradient (IG). Lastly, the Masked Language Modeling (MLM) model has been employed to capture domain-specific nuances to reduce hate intensity. We masked the 50\% hateful words of the comments identified as hateful and predicted the alternative words for these masked terms to generate convincing sentences. An optimal replacement for the original hate comments from the feasible sentences is preferred. Extensive experiments have been conducted on several recent datasets using automatic metric-based evaluation (BERTScore) and thorough human evaluation. To enhance the faithfulness in human evaluation, we arranged a group of three human annotators with varied expertise.

The rampant occurrence of cybersecurity breaches imposes substantial limitations on the progress of network infrastructures, leading to compromised data, financial losses, potential harm to individuals, and disruptions in essential services. The current security landscape demands the urgent development of a holistic security assessment solution that encompasses vulnerability analysis and investigates the potential exploitation of these vulnerabilities as attack paths. In this paper, we propose Prometheus, an advanced system designed to provide a detailed analysis of the security posture of computing infrastructures. Using user-provided information, such as device details and software versions, Prometheus performs a comprehensive security assessment. This assessment includes identifying associated vulnerabilities and constructing potential attack graphs that adversaries can exploit. Furthermore, Prometheus evaluates the exploitability of these attack paths and quantifies the overall security posture through a scoring mechanism. The system takes a holistic approach by analyzing security layers encompassing hardware, system, network, and cryptography. Furthermore, Prometheus delves into the interconnections between these layers, exploring how vulnerabilities in one layer can be leveraged to exploit vulnerabilities in others. In this paper, we present the end-to-end pipeline implemented in Prometheus, showcasing the systematic approach adopted for conducting this thorough security analysis.

This article presents a comparative analysis of the ability of two large language model (LLM)-based chatbots, ChatGPT and Bing Chat, recently rebranded to Microsoft Copilot, to detect veracity of political information. We use AI auditing methodology to investigate how chatbots evaluate true, false, and borderline statements on five topics: COVID-19, Russian aggression against Ukraine, the Holocaust, climate change, and LGBTQ+ related debates. We compare how the chatbots perform in high- and low-resource languages by using prompts in English, Russian, and Ukrainian. Furthermore, we explore the ability of chatbots to evaluate statements according to political communication concepts of disinformation, misinformation, and conspiracy theory, using definition-oriented prompts. We also systematically test how such evaluations are influenced by source bias which we model by attributing specific claims to various political and social actors. The results show high performance of ChatGPT for the baseline veracity evaluation task, with 72 percent of the cases evaluated correctly on average across languages without pre-training. Bing Chat performed worse with a 67 percent accuracy. We observe significant disparities in how chatbots evaluate prompts in high- and low-resource languages and how they adapt their evaluations to political communication concepts with ChatGPT providing more nuanced outputs than Bing Chat. Finally, we find that for some veracity detection-related tasks, the performance of chatbots varied depending on the topic of the statement or the source to which it is attributed. These findings highlight the potential of LLM-based chatbots in tackling different forms of false information in online environments, but also points to the substantial variation in terms of how such potential is realized due to specific factors, such as language of the prompt or the topic.

This review paper provides an integrated perspective of Explainable Artificial Intelligence techniques applied to Brain-Computer Interfaces. BCIs use predictive models to interpret brain signals for various high-stake applications. However, achieving explainability in these complex models is challenging as it compromises accuracy. The field of XAI has emerged to address the need for explainability across various stakeholders, but there is a lack of an integrated perspective in XAI for BCI (XAI4BCI) literature. It is necessary to differentiate key concepts like explainability, interpretability, and understanding in this context and formulate a comprehensive framework. To understand the need of XAI for BCI, we pose six key research questions for a systematic review and meta-analysis, encompassing its purposes, applications, usability, and technical feasibility. We employ the PRISMA methodology -- preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses to review (n=1246) and analyze (n=84) studies published in 2015 and onwards for key insights. The results highlight that current research primarily focuses on interpretability for developers and researchers, aiming to justify outcomes and enhance model performance. We discuss the unique approaches, advantages, and limitations of XAI4BCI from the literature. We draw insights from philosophy, psychology, and social sciences. We propose a design space for XAI4BCI, considering the evolving need to visualize and investigate predictive model outcomes customised for various stakeholders in the BCI development and deployment lifecycle. This paper is the first to focus solely on reviewing XAI4BCI research articles. This systematic review and meta-analysis findings with the proposed design space prompt important discussions on establishing standards for BCI explanations, highlighting current limitations, and guiding the future of XAI in BCI.

The field of explainable artificial intelligence emerged in response to the growing need for more transparent and reliable models. However, using raw features to provide explanations has been disputed in several works lately, advocating for more user-understandable explanations. To address this issue, a wide range of papers proposing Concept-based eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (C-XAI) methods have arisen in recent years. Nevertheless, a unified categorization and precise field definition are still missing. This paper fills the gap by offering a thorough review of C-XAI approaches. We define and identify different concepts and explanation types. We provide a taxonomy identifying nine categories and propose guidelines for selecting a suitable category based on the development context. Additionally, we report common evaluation strategies including metrics, human evaluations and dataset employed, aiming to assist the development of future methods. We believe this survey will serve researchers, practitioners, and domain experts in comprehending and advancing this innovative field.

There exists a growing discourse around the domination of Big Tech on the landscape of artificial intelligence (AI) research, yet our comprehension of this phenomenon remains cursory. This paper aims to broaden and deepen our understanding of Big Tech's reach and power within AI research. It highlights the dominance not merely in terms of sheer publication volume but rather in the propagation of new ideas or \textit{memes}. Current studies often oversimplify the concept of influence to the share of affiliations in academic papers, typically sourced from limited databases such as arXiv or specific academic conferences. The main goal of this paper is to unravel the specific nuances of such influence, determining which AI ideas are predominantly driven by Big Tech entities. By employing network and memetic analysis on AI-oriented paper abstracts and their citation network, we are able to grasp a deeper insight into this phenomenon. By utilizing two databases: OpenAlex and S2ORC, we are able to perform such analysis on a much bigger scale than previous attempts. Our findings suggest, that while Big Tech-affiliated papers are disproportionately more cited in some areas, the most cited papers are those affiliated with both Big Tech and Academia. Focusing on the most contagious memes, their attribution to specific affiliation groups (Big Tech, Academia, mixed affiliation) seems to be equally distributed between those three groups. This suggests that the notion of Big Tech domination over AI research is oversimplified in the discourse. Ultimately, this more nuanced understanding of Big Tech's and Academia's influence could inform a more symbiotic alliance between these stakeholders which would better serve the dual goals of societal welfare and the scientific integrity of AI research.

Byzantine machine learning has garnered considerable attention in light of the unpredictable faults that can occur in large-scale distributed learning systems. The key to secure resilience against Byzantine machines in distributed learning is resilient aggregation mechanisms. Although abundant resilient aggregation rules have been proposed, they are designed in ad-hoc manners, imposing extra barriers on comparing, analyzing, and improving the rules across performance criteria. This paper studies near-optimal aggregation rules using clustering in the presence of outliers. Our outlier-robust clustering approach utilizes geometric properties of the update vectors provided by workers. Our analysis show that constant approximations to the 1-center and 1-mean clustering problems with outliers provide near-optimal resilient aggregators for metric-based criteria, which have been proven to be crucial in the homogeneous and heterogeneous cases respectively. In addition, we discuss two contradicting types of attacks under which no single aggregation rule is guaranteed to improve upon the naive average. Based on the discussion, we propose a two-phase resilient aggregation framework. We run experiments for image classification using a non-convex loss function. The proposed algorithms outperform previously known aggregation rules by a large margin with both homogeneous and heterogeneous data distributions among non-faulty workers. Code and appendix are available at https://github.com/jerry907/AAAI24-RASHB.