Twitter is one of the most popular social networks attracting millions of users, while a considerable proportion of online discourse is captured. It provides a simple usage framework with short messages and an efficient application programming interface (API) enabling the research community to study and analyze several aspects of this social network. However, the Twitter usage simplicity can lead to malicious handling by various bots. The malicious handling phenomenon expands in online discourse, especially during the electoral periods, where except the legitimate bots used for dissemination and communication purposes, the goal is to manipulate the public opinion and the electorate towards a certain direction, specific ideology, or political party. This paper focuses on the design of a novel system for identifying Twitter bots based on labeled Twitter data. To this end, a supervised machine learning (ML) framework is adopted using an Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) algorithm, where the hyper-parameters are tuned via cross-validation. Our study also deploys Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) for explaining the ML model predictions by calculating feature importance, using the game theoretic-based Shapley values. Experimental evaluation on distinct Twitter datasets demonstrate the superiority of our approach, in terms of bot detection accuracy, when compared against a recent state-of-the-art Twitter bot detection method.

Improvements in autonomy offer the potential for positive outcomes in a number of domains, yet guaranteeing their safe deployment is difficult. This work investigates how humans can intelligently supervise agents to achieve some level of safety even when performance guarantees are elusive. The motivating research question is: In safety-critical settings, can we avoid the need to have one human supervise one machine at all times? The paper formalizes this 'scaling supervision' problem, and investigates its application to the safety-critical context of autonomous vehicles (AVs) merging into traffic. It proposes a conservative, reachability-based method to reduce the burden on the AVs' human supervisors, which allows for the establishment of high-confidence upper bounds on the supervision requirements in this setting. Order statistics and traffic simulations with deep reinforcement learning show analytically and numerically that teaming of AVs enables supervision time sublinear in AV adoption. A key takeaway is that, despite present imperfections of AVs, supervision becomes more tractable as AVs are deployed en masse. While this work focuses on AVs, the scalable supervision framework is relevant to a broader array of autonomous control challenges.

The AI Robotics Ethics Society (AIRES) is a non-profit organization founded in 2018 by Aaron Hui to promote awareness and the importance of ethical implementation and regulation of AI. AIRES is now an organization with chapters at universities such as UCLA (Los Angeles), USC (University of Southern California), Caltech (California Institute of Technology), Stanford University, Cornell University, Brown University, and the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (Brazil). AIRES at PUCRS is the first international chapter of AIRES, and as such, we are committed to promoting and enhancing the AIRES Mission. Our mission is to focus on educating the AI leaders of tomorrow in ethical principles to ensure that AI is created ethically and responsibly. As there are still few proposals for how we should implement ethical principles and normative guidelines in the practice of AI system development, the goal of this work is to try to bridge this gap between discourse and praxis. Between abstract principles and technical implementation. In this work, we seek to introduce the reader to the topic of AI Ethics and Safety. At the same time, we present several tools to help developers of intelligent systems develop "good" models. This work is a developing guide published in English and Portuguese. Contributions and suggestions are welcome.

Artificial intelligence (AI) enables machines to learn from human experience, adjust to new inputs, and perform human-like tasks. AI is progressing rapidly and is transforming the way businesses operate, from process automation to cognitive augmentation of tasks and intelligent process/data analytics. However, the main challenge for human users would be to understand and appropriately trust the result of AI algorithms and methods. In this paper, to address this challenge, we study and analyze the recent work done in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods and tools. We introduce a novel XAI process, which facilitates producing explainable models while maintaining a high level of learning performance. We present an interactive evidence-based approach to assist human users in comprehending and trusting the results and output created by AI-enabled algorithms. We adopt a typical scenario in the Banking domain for analyzing customer transactions. We develop a digital dashboard to facilitate interacting with the algorithm results and discuss how the proposed XAI method can significantly improve the confidence of data scientists in understanding the result of AI-enabled algorithms.

The range of application of artificial intelligence (AI) is vast, as is the potential for harm. Growing awareness of potential risks from AI systems has spurred action to address those risks, while eroding confidence in AI systems and the organizations that develop them. A 2019 study found over 80 organizations that published and adopted "AI ethics principles'', and more have joined since. But the principles often leave a gap between the "what" and the "how" of trustworthy AI development. Such gaps have enabled questionable or ethically dubious behavior, which casts doubts on the trustworthiness of specific organizations, and the field more broadly. There is thus an urgent need for concrete methods that both enable AI developers to prevent harm and allow them to demonstrate their trustworthiness through verifiable behavior. Below, we explore mechanisms (drawn from arXiv:2004.07213) for creating an ecosystem where AI developers can earn trust - if they are trustworthy. Better assessment of developer trustworthiness could inform user choice, employee actions, investment decisions, legal recourse, and emerging governance regimes.

Extreme Multilabel Text Classification (XMTC) is a text classification problem in which, (i) the output space is extremely large, (ii) each data point may have multiple positive labels, and (iii) the data follows a strongly imbalanced distribution. With applications in recommendation systems and automatic tagging of web-scale documents, the research on XMTC has been focused on improving prediction accuracy and dealing with imbalanced data. However, the robustness of deep learning based XMTC models against adversarial examples has been largely underexplored. In this paper, we investigate the behaviour of XMTC models under adversarial attacks. To this end, first, we define adversarial attacks in multilabel text classification problems. We categorize attacking multilabel text classifiers as (a) positive-targeted, where the target positive label should fall out of top-k predicted labels, and (b) negative-targeted, where the target negative label should be among the top-k predicted labels. Then, by experiments on APLC-XLNet and AttentionXML, we show that XMTC models are highly vulnerable to positive-targeted attacks but more robust to negative-targeted ones. Furthermore, our experiments show that the success rate of positive-targeted adversarial attacks has an imbalanced distribution. More precisely, tail classes are highly vulnerable to adversarial attacks for which an attacker can generate adversarial samples with high similarity to the actual data-points. To overcome this problem, we explore the effect of rebalanced loss functions in XMTC where not only do they increase accuracy on tail classes, but they also improve the robustness of these classes against adversarial attacks. The code for our experiments is available at https://github.com/xmc-aalto/adv-xmtc

As consensus across the various published AI ethics principles is approached, a gap remains between high-level principles and practical techniques that can be readily adopted to design and develop responsible AI systems. We examine the practices and experiences of researchers and engineers from Australia's national scientific research agency (CSIRO), who are involved in designing and developing AI systems for a range of purposes. Semi-structured interviews were used to examine how the practices of the participants relate to and align with a set of high-level AI ethics principles that are proposed by the Australian Government. The principles comprise: Privacy Protection & Security, Reliability & Safety, Transparency & Explainability, Fairness, Contestability, Accountability, Human-centred Values, and Human, Social & Environmental Wellbeing. The insights of the researchers and engineers as well as the challenges that arose for them in the practical application of the principles are examined. Finally, a set of organisational responses are provided to support the implementation of high-level AI ethics principles into practice.

NGOs and activists have called for a ban on the use of autonomous weapons that are no longer strictly controlled by human hands, calling the so-called "killer robots" a "threat to humanity". The move comes as the Sixth Review Conference of the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) takes place in Geneva this week, chaired by ambassador Yann Hwang of France. Member states are expected to decide whether to negotiate a treaty that prohibits the use of weapons that are not decisively controlled by human hands. Human Rights Watch (HRW) called for a new treaty to clarify and strengthen existing laws related to these new technologies, adding that "the emergence of autonomous weapons systems and the prospect of losing meaningful human control over the use of force are grave threats that demand urgent action". "These are weapons systems that would operate without meaningful human control. That is, instead of a human, you would have the weapon system itself that would select the target and decide when to pull the trigger. You would not have humans performing these functions, instead, artificial intelligence would replace the soldier on the battlefield," explained Steve Goose, director of Human Rights Watch's Arms Division.

US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has decided against disciplining any members of the United States military for an August drone attack in Kabul that killed 10 civilians, including seven children, the New York Times and several US news outlets reported. An internal Pentagon review concluded last month that the August 29 bombing in the Afghan capital did not violate the laws of war and was not caused by misconduct or criminal negligence. The New York Times first reported on Austin's decision on Monday, citing an unidentified senior Pentagon official who said the defence secretary had approved a recommendation from two US military commanders not to discipline any personnel involved in the attack. The Washington Post, NBC News, and The Associated Press later confirmed the decision, also citing unidentified US officials. Asked about the investigation during a news briefing on Monday afternoon, Pentagon spokesman John Kirby did not directly confirm the media outlets' reports.

Researchers led by a scholar from City University of Hong Kong (CityU) have developed a novel artificial intelligence (AI) framework to make predictions on potential synergistic anti-cancer drug combinations for both therapeutic and toxic effects. Many of the biotech sector's biggest wins of late have come through drug combinations, utilizing the strengths and downplaying the weaknesses of available therapies, including recent developments from Oncolytics Biotech Inc. Merck, Amgen Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, and Mirati Therapeutics, Inc. For example, significant work is being done on behalf of women in America, where breast cancer is known to be the second leading cause of death from cancer--with an estimated 42,000 deaths in the US in 2020. The problem also persists in China, where breast cancer is now estimated to be the largest subtype of cancer among women, with over 416,000 cases and over 117,000 deaths in 2020. As part of the fight against breast cancer, a multinational front is moving forward between US-based Oncolytics Biotech Inc. and Chinese multinational clinical-stage biopharma developers Adlai Nortye.