Most events in the world receive at most brief coverage by the news media. Occasionally, however, an event will trigger a media storm, with voluminous and widespread coverage lasting for weeks instead of days. In this work, we develop and apply a pairwise article similarity model, allowing us to identify story clusters in corpora covering local and national online news, and thereby create a comprehensive corpus of media storms over a nearly two year period. Using this corpus, we investigate media storms at a new level of granularity, allowing us to validate claims about storm evolution and topical distribution, and provide empirical support for previously hypothesized patterns of influence of storms on media coverage and intermedia agenda setting.

Machine Unlearning is rising as a new field, driven by the pressing necessity of ensuring privacy in modern artificial intelligence models. This technique primarily aims to eradicate any residual influence of a specific subset of data from the knowledge acquired by a neural model during its training. This work introduces a novel unlearning algorithm, denoted as Distance-based Unlearning via Centroid Kinematics (DUCK), which employs metric learning to guide the removal of samples matching the nearest incorrect centroid in the embedding space. Evaluation of the algorithm's performance is conducted across various benchmark datasets in two distinct scenarios, class removal, and homogeneous sampling removal, obtaining state-of-the-art performance. We introduce a novel metric, called Adaptive Unlearning Score (AUS), encompassing not only the efficacy of the unlearning process in forgetting target data but also quantifying the performance loss relative to the original model. Moreover, we propose a novel membership inference attack to assess the algorithm's capacity to erase previously acquired knowledge, designed to be adaptable to future methodologies.

As Moore's Law continues to increase the complexity of electronic systems, Electronic Design Automation (EDA) must advance to meet global demand. An important example of an EDA technology is SKILL, a scripting language used to customize and extend EDA software. Recently, code generation models using the transformer architecture have achieved impressive results in academic settings and have even been used in commercial developer tools to improve developer productivity. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to apply transformers to SKILL code autocompletion towards improving the productivity of hardware design engineers. In this study, a novel, data-efficient methodology for generating SKILL code is proposed and experimentally validated. More specifically, we propose a novel methodology for (i) creating a high-quality SKILL dataset with both unlabeled and labeled data, (ii) a training strategy where T5 models pre-trained on general programming language code are fine-tuned on our custom SKILL dataset using unsupervised and supervised learning, and (iii) evaluating synthesized SKILL code. We show that models trained using the proposed methodology outperform baselines in terms of human-judgment score and BLEU score. A major challenge faced was the extremely small amount of available SKILL code data that can be used to train a transformer model to generate SKILL code. Despite our validated improvements, the extremely small dataset available to us was still not enough to train a model that can reliably autocomplete SKILL code. We discuss this and other limitations as well as future work that could address these limitations.

Increasing interest in ensuring safety of next-generation Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems calls for novel approaches to embedding morality into autonomous agents. Traditionally, this has been done by imposing explicit top-down rules or hard constraints on systems, for example by filtering system outputs through pre-defined ethical rules. Recently, instead, entirely bottom-up methods for learning implicit preferences from human behavior have become increasingly popular, such as those for training and fine-tuning Large Language Models. In this paper, we provide a systematization of existing approaches to the problem of introducing morality in machines - modeled as a continuum, and argue that the majority of popular techniques lie at the extremes - either being fully hard-coded, or entirely learned, where no explicit statement of any moral principle is required. Given the relative strengths and weaknesses of each type of methodology, we argue that more hybrid solutions are needed to create adaptable and robust, yet more controllable and interpretable agents. In particular, we present three case studies of recent works which use learning from experience (i.e., Reinforcement Learning) to explicitly provide moral principles to learning agents - either as intrinsic rewards, moral logical constraints or textual principles for language models. For example, using intrinsic rewards in Social Dilemma games, we demonstrate how it is possible to represent classical moral frameworks for agents. We also present an overview of the existing work in this area in order to provide empirical evidence for the potential of this hybrid approach. We then discuss strategies for evaluating the effectiveness of moral learning agents. Finally, we present open research questions and implications for the future of AI safety and ethics which are emerging from this framework.

With the proliferation of social media, there has been a sharp increase in offensive content, particularly targeting vulnerable groups, exacerbating social problems such as hatred, racism, and sexism. Detecting offensive language use is crucial to prevent offensive language from being widely shared on social media. However, the accurate detection of irony, implication, and various forms of hate speech on social media remains a challenge. Natural language-based deep learning models require extensive training with large, comprehensive, and labeled datasets. Unfortunately, manually creating such datasets is both costly and error-prone. Additionally, the presence of human-bias in offensive language datasets is a major concern for deep learning models. In this paper, we propose a linguistic data augmentation approach to reduce bias in labeling processes, which aims to mitigate the influence of human bias by leveraging the power of machines to improve the accuracy and fairness of labeling processes. This approach has the potential to improve offensive language classification tasks across multiple languages and reduce the prevalence of offensive content on social media.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been clearly established as a technology with the potential to revolutionize fields from healthcare to finance - if developed and deployed responsibly. This is the topic of responsible AI, which emphasizes the need to develop trustworthy AI systems that minimize bias, protect privacy, support security, and enhance transparency and accountability. Explainable AI (XAI) has been broadly considered as a building block for responsible AI (RAI), with most of the literature considering it as a solution for improved transparency. This work proposes that XAI and responsible AI are significantly more deeply entwined. In this work, we explore state-of-the-art literature on RAI and XAI technologies. Based on our findings, we demonstrate that XAI can be utilized to ensure fairness, robustness, privacy, security, and transparency in a wide range of contexts. Our findings lead us to conclude that XAI is an essential foundation for every pillar of RAI.

The alignment tuning process of large language models (LLMs) typically involves instruction learning through supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and preference tuning via reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF). A recent study, LIMA (Zhou et al. 2023), shows that using merely 1K examples for SFT can achieve significant alignment performance as well, suggesting that the effect of alignment tuning might be "superficial." This raises questions about how exactly the alignment tuning transforms a base LLM. We analyze the effect of alignment tuning by examining the token distribution shift between base LLMs and their aligned counterpart. Our findings reveal that base LLMs and their alignment-tuned versions perform nearly identically in decoding on the majority of token positions. Most distribution shifts occur with stylistic tokens. These direct evidence strongly supports the Superficial Alignment Hypothesis suggested by LIMA. Based on these findings, we rethink the alignment of LLMs by posing the research question: how effectively can we align base LLMs without SFT or RLHF? To address this, we introduce a simple, tuning-free alignment method, URIAL. URIAL achieves effective alignment purely through in-context learning (ICL) with base LLMs, requiring as few as three constant stylistic examples and a system prompt. We conduct a fine-grained and interpretable evaluation on a diverse set of examples, named JUST-EVAL-INSTRUCT. Results demonstrate that base LLMs with URIAL can match or even surpass the performance of LLMs aligned with SFT or SFT+RLHF. We show that the gap between tuning-free and tuning-based alignment methods can be significantly reduced through strategic prompting and ICL. Our findings on the superficial nature of alignment tuning and results with URIAL suggest that deeper analysis and theoretical understanding of alignment is crucial to future LLM research.

The benefits and capabilities of pre-trained language models (LLMs) in current and future innovations are vital to any society. However, introducing and using LLMs comes with biases and discrimination, resulting in concerns about equality, diversity and fairness, and must be addressed. While understanding and acknowledging bias in LLMs and developing mitigation strategies are crucial, the generalised assumptions towards societal needs can result in disadvantages towards under-represented societies and indigenous populations. Furthermore, the ongoing changes to actual and proposed amendments to regulations and laws worldwide also impact research capabilities in tackling the bias problem. This research presents a comprehensive survey synthesising the current trends and limitations in techniques used for identifying and mitigating bias in LLMs, where the overview of methods for tackling bias are grouped into metrics, benchmark datasets, and mitigation strategies. The importance and novelty of this survey are that it explores the perspective of under-represented societies. We argue that current practices tackling the bias problem cannot simply be 'plugged in' to address the needs of under-represented societies. We use examples from New Zealand to present requirements for adopting existing techniques to under-represented societies.

Commercial contracts are known to be a valuable source for deriving project-specific requirements. However, contract negotiations mainly occur among the legal counsel of the parties involved. The participation of non-legal stakeholders, including requirement analysts, engineers, and solution architects, whose primary responsibility lies in ensuring the seamless implementation of contractual terms, is often indirect and inadequate. Consequently, a significant number of sentences in contractual clauses, though legally accurate, can appear unfair from an implementation perspective to non-legal stakeholders. This perception poses a problem since requirements indicated in the clauses are obligatory and can involve punitive measures and penalties if not implemented as committed in the contract. Therefore, the identification of potentially unfair clauses in contracts becomes crucial. In this work, we conduct an empirical study to analyze the perspectives of different stakeholders regarding contractual fairness. We then investigate the ability of Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) to identify unfairness in contractual sentences by comparing chain of thought prompting and semi-supervised fine-tuning approaches. Using BERT-based fine-tuning, we achieved an accuracy of 84% on a dataset consisting of proprietary contracts. It outperformed chain of thought prompting using Vicuna-13B by a margin of 9%.

Machine unlearning has emerged as a prominent and challenging area of interest, driven in large part by the rising regulatory demands for industries to delete user data upon request and the heightened awareness of privacy. Existing approaches either retrain models from scratch or use several finetuning steps for every deletion request, often constrained by computational resource limitations and restricted access to the original training data. In this work, we introduce a novel class unlearning algorithm designed to strategically eliminate an entire class or a group of classes from the learned model. To that end, our algorithm first estimates the Retain Space and the Forget Space, representing the feature or activation spaces for samples from classes to be retained and unlearned, respectively. To obtain these spaces, we propose a novel singular value decomposition-based technique that requires layer wise collection of network activations from a few forward passes through the network. We then compute the shared information between these spaces and remove it from the forget space to isolate class-discriminatory feature space for unlearning. Finally, we project the model weights in the orthogonal direction of the class-discriminatory space to obtain the unlearned model. We demonstrate our algorithm's efficacy on ImageNet using a Vision Transformer with only $\sim$1.5% drop in retain accuracy compared to the original model while maintaining under 1% accuracy on the unlearned class samples. Further, our algorithm consistently performs well when subject to Membership Inference Attacks showing 7.8% improvement on average across a variety of image classification datasets and network architectures, as compared to other baselines while being $\sim$6x more computationally efficient.