Text-to-image generation (TTIG) models, a recent addition to creative AI, can generate images based on a text description. These models have begun to rival the work of professional creatives, and sparked discussions on the future of creative work, loss of jobs, and copyright issues, amongst other important implications. To support the sustainable adoption of TTIG, we must provide rich, reliable and transparent insights into how professionals perceive, adopt and use TTIG. Crucially though, the public debate is shallow, narrow and lacking transparency, while academic work has focused on studying the use of TTIG in a general artist population, but not on the perceptions and attitudes of professionals in a specific industry. In this paper, we contribute a qualitative, exploratory interview study on TTIG in the Finnish videogame industry. Through a Template Analysis on semi-structured interviews with 14 game professionals, we reveal 12 overarching themes, structured into 49 sub-themes on professionals' perception, adoption and use of TTIG systems in games industry practice. Experiencing (yet another) change of roles and creative processes, our participants' reflections can inform discussions within the industry, be used by policymakers to inform urgently needed legislation, and support researchers in games, HCI and AI to support the sustainable, professional use of TTIG to benefit people and games as cultural artefacts.

Anomaly detection is an important task for complex systems (e.g., industrial facilities, manufacturing, large-scale science experiments), where failures in a sub-system can lead to low yield, faulty products, or even damage to components. While complex systems often have a wealth of data, labeled anomalies are typically rare (or even nonexistent) and expensive to acquire. Unsupervised approaches are therefore common and typically search for anomalies either by distance or density of examples in the input feature space (or some associated low-dimensional representation). This paper presents a novel approach called CoAD, which is specifically designed for multi-modal tasks and identifies anomalies based on \textit{coincident} behavior across two different slices of the feature space. We define an \textit{unsupervised} metric, $\hat{F}_\beta$, out of analogy to the supervised classification $F_\beta$ statistic. CoAD uses $\hat{F}_\beta$ to train an anomaly detection algorithm on \textit{unlabeled data}, based on the expectation that anomalous behavior in one feature slice is coincident with anomalous behavior in the other. The method is illustrated using a synthetic outlier data set and a MNIST-based image data set, and is compared to prior state-of-the-art on two real-world tasks: a metal milling data set and a data set from a particle accelerator.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is currently spearheaded by machine learning (ML) methods such as deep learning (DL) which have accelerated progress on many tasks thought to be out of reach of AI. These ML methods can often be compute hungry, energy intensive, and result in significant carbon emissions, a known driver of anthropogenic climate change. Additionally, the platforms on which ML systems run are associated with environmental impacts including and beyond carbon emissions. The solution lionized by both industry and the ML community to improve the environmental sustainability of ML is to increase the efficiency with which ML systems operate in terms of both compute and energy consumption. In this perspective, we argue that efficiency alone is not enough to make ML as a technology environmentally sustainable. We do so by presenting three high level discrepancies between the effect of efficiency on the environmental sustainability of ML when considering the many variables which it interacts with. In doing so, we comprehensively demonstrate, at multiple levels of granularity both technical and non-technical reasons, why efficiency is not enough to fully remedy the environmental impacts of ML. Based on this, we present and argue for systems thinking as a viable path towards improving the environmental sustainability of ML holistically.

Fox News correspondent Gillian Turner has the latest on the president's focus amid calls for an impeachment inquiry on'Special Report.' Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is signaling that he is serious about pushing through some form of regulatory framework for artificial intelligence when Congress is back from its August recess. Schumer is planning on kicking off a series of bipartisan "AI Insight Forums," he told Senate Democrats in a letter on Friday morning, in a bid to get lawmakers caught up on the rapidly advancing tech. His first, on Sept. 13, is expected to feature tech leaders like Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sam Altman, among others. "These forums will build on the longstanding work of our Committees by supercharging the Senate's typical process so we can stay ahead of AI's rapid development," Schumer said.

Machine learning can provide predictions with disparate outcomes, in which subgroups of the population (e.g., defined by age, gender, or other sensitive attributes) are systematically disadvantaged. In order to comply with upcoming legislation, practitioners need to locate such disparate outcomes. However, previous literature typically detects disparities through statistical procedures for when the sensitive attribute is specified a priori. This limits applicability in real-world settings where datasets are high dimensional and, on top of that, sensitive attributes may be unknown. As a remedy, we propose a data-driven framework called Automatic Location of Disparities (ALD) which aims at locating disparities in machine learning. ALD meets several demands from industry: ALD (1) is applicable to arbitrary machine learning classifiers; (2) operates on different definitions of disparities (e.g., statistical parity or equalized odds); and (3) deals with both categorical and continuous predictors even if disparities arise from complex and multi-way interactions known as intersectionality (e. g., age above 60 and female). ALD produces interpretable audit reports as output. We demonstrate the effectiveness of ALD based on both synthetic and real-world datasets. As a result, we empower practitioners to effectively locate and mitigate disparities in machine learning algorithms, conduct algorithmic audits, and protect individuals from discrimination.

Our interdisciplinary study investigates how effectively U.S. laws confront the challenges posed by Generative AI to human values. Through an analysis of diverse hypothetical scenarios crafted during an expert workshop, we have identified notable gaps and uncertainties within the existing legal framework regarding the protection of fundamental values, such as privacy, autonomy, dignity, diversity, equity, and physical/mental well-being. Constitutional and civil rights, it appears, may not provide sufficient protection against AI-generated discriminatory outputs. Furthermore, even if we exclude the liability shield provided by Section 230, proving causation for defamation and product liability claims is a challenging endeavor due to the intricate and opaque nature of AI systems. To address the unique and unforeseeable threats posed by Generative AI, we advocate for legal frameworks that evolve to recognize new threats and provide proactive, auditable guidelines to industry stakeholders. Addressing these issues requires deep interdisciplinary collaborations to identify harms, values, and mitigation strategies.

Accurate prediction of what types of patents that companies will apply for in the next period of time can figure out their development strategies and help them discover potential partners or competitors in advance. Although important, this problem has been rarely studied in previous research due to the challenges in modelling companies' continuously evolving preferences and capturing the semantic correlations of classification codes. To fill in this gap, we propose an event-based dynamic graph learning framework for patent application trend prediction. In particular, our method is founded on the memorable representations of both companies and patent classification codes. When a new patent is observed, the representations of the related companies and classification codes are updated according to the historical memories and the currently encoded messages. Moreover, a hierarchical message passing mechanism is provided to capture the semantic proximities of patent classification codes by updating their representations along the hierarchical taxonomy. Finally, the patent application trend is predicted by aggregating the representations of the target company and classification codes from static, dynamic, and hierarchical perspectives. Experiments on real-world data demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach under various experimental conditions, and also reveal the abilities of our method in learning semantics of classification codes and tracking technology developing trajectories of companies.

"Once the machine thinking method had started, it would not take long to outstrip our feeble powers. At some stage therefore we should have to expect the machines to take control" Alan Turing 1951 [35] AGI [91] safety is of the utmost urgency, since corporations and research labs are racing to build AGI despite prominent AI researchers and business leaders warning that it may lead to human extinction [11]. While governments are drafting AI regulations, there's little indication that they will be sufficient to resist competitive pressures and prevent the creation of AGI. Median estimates on the forecasting platform Metaculus of the date of AGI's creation have plummeted over the past few years from many decades away to 2027 [25] or 2032 [24] depending on definitions, with superintelligence expected to follow a few years later [23]. Is Alan Turing correct that we now "have to expect the machines to take control"?

Algorithm fairness has become a central problem for the broad adoption of artificial intelligence. Although the past decade has witnessed an explosion of excellent work studying algorithm biases, achieving fairness in real-world AI production systems has remained a challenging task. Most existing works fail to excel in practical applications since either they have conflicting measurement techniques and/ or heavy assumptions, or require code-access of the production models, whereas real systems demand an easy-to-implement measurement framework and a systematic way to correct the detected sources of bias. In this paper, we leverage recent advances in causal inference and interpretable machine learning to present an algorithm-agnostic framework (MIIF) to Measure, Interpret, and Improve the Fairness of an algorithmic decision. We measure the algorithm bias using randomized experiments, which enables the simultaneous measurement of disparate treatment, disparate impact, and economic value. Furthermore, using modern interpretability techniques, we develop an explainable machine learning model which accurately interprets and distills the beliefs of a blackbox algorithm. Altogether, these techniques create a simple and powerful toolset for studying algorithm fairness, especially for understanding the cost of fairness in practical applications like e-commerce and targeted advertising, where industry A/B testing is already abundant.

Ranking is a ubiquitous method for focusing the attention of human evaluators on a manageable subset of options. Its use ranges from surfacing potentially relevant products on an e-commerce site to prioritizing college applications for human review. While ranking can make human evaluation far more effective by focusing attention on the most promising options, we argue that it can introduce unfairness if the uncertainty of the underlying relevance model differs between groups of options. Unfortunately, such disparity in uncertainty appears widespread, since the relevance estimates for minority groups tend to have higher uncertainty due to a lack of data or appropriate features. To overcome this fairness issue, we propose Equal-Opportunity Ranking (EOR) as a new fairness criterion for ranking that provably corrects for the disparity in uncertainty between groups. Furthermore, we present a practical algorithm for computing EOR rankings in time $O(n \log(n))$ and prove its close approximation guarantee to the globally optimal solution. In a comprehensive empirical evaluation on synthetic data, a US Census dataset, and a real-world case study of Amazon search queries, we find that the algorithm reliably guarantees EOR fairness while providing effective rankings.