You may have heard about the Supreme Court's recent ruling in Sackett v. EPA that the Clean Water Act does not permit the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate the use of wetlands that are not connected at the surface to lakes, rivers and streams. While there's been plenty of analysis of the significant legal flaws in the ruling--which will greatly restrict the ability of the EPA to protect not only wetlands but our entire fresh water system--less has been said about the science undergirding the case. The reality is this: The ruling takes no consideration whatsoever of the science of water. The court ruled that protection under the CWA only applies when wetlands have "a continuous surface connection to bodies that are'waters of the United States' in their own right, so that there is no clear demarcation between'waters' and wetlands." Justice Samuel Alito arrived at this distinction by parsing the wording of the Clean Water Act as passed by Congress in 1972 and amended in 2018--specifically the words "waters of the United States"--and the opinion makes much of this means of arriving at the decision.

Experts discuss what is at stake in the AI race between the United States and China, warning it could'dictate the future of humanity.' China and the U.S. have been developing artificial intelligence (AI) systems at a rapid pace that has evolved into a race for dominance, but should China surpass the U.S. in its technological capability, experts warn of dire consequences for America. If China does win an AI race, its actions would impact the U.S. societally, militarily and culturally, putting Americans at their mercy as they shape free speech and power in modern society. "If you are the one that cracks that glass ceiling, if you will, and breaks through in AI, you get to go and also set what the rules of the road look like for that technology for quite some time," James Czerniawski, a senior policy analyst at Americans for Prosperity, told Fox News Digital. "If China is the one that's able to do that, I think they've kind of made it pretty clear where they stand when it comes to AI," he added.

As the use of machine learning models in real world high-stakes decision settings continues to grow, it is highly important that we are able to audit and control for any potential fairness violations these models may exhibit towards certain groups. To do so, one naturally requires access to sensitive attributes, such as demographics, gender, or other potentially sensitive features that determine group membership. Unfortunately, in many settings, this information is often unavailable. In this work we study the well known \emph{equalized odds} (EOD) definition of fairness. In a setting without sensitive attributes, we first provide tight and computable upper bounds for the EOD violation of a predictor. These bounds precisely reflect the worst possible EOD violation. Second, we demonstrate how one can provably control the worst-case EOD by a new post-processing correction method. Our results characterize when directly controlling for EOD with respect to the predicted sensitive attributes is -- and when is not -- optimal when it comes to controlling worst-case EOD. Our results hold under assumptions that are milder than previous works, and we illustrate these results with experiments on synthetic and real datasets.

Vertical federated learning (VFL), a variant of Federated Learning (FL), has recently drawn increasing attention as the VFL matches the enterprises' demands of leveraging more valuable features to achieve better model performance. However, conventional VFL methods may run into data deficiency as they exploit only aligned and labeled samples (belonging to different parties), leaving often the majority of unaligned and unlabeled samples unused. The data deficiency hampers the effort of the federation. In this work, we propose a Federated Hybrid Self-Supervised Learning framework, named FedHSSL, that utilizes cross-party views (i.e., dispersed features) of samples aligned among parties and local views (i.e., augmentation) of unaligned samples within each party to improve the representation learning capability of the VFL joint model. FedHSSL further exploits invariant features across parties to boost the performance of the joint model through partial model aggregation. FedHSSL, as a framework, can work with various representative SSL methods. We empirically demonstrate that FedHSSL methods outperform baselines by large margins. We provide an in-depth analysis of FedHSSL regarding label leakage, which is rarely investigated in existing self-supervised VFL works. The experimental results show that, with proper protection, FedHSSL achieves the best privacy-utility trade-off against the state-of-the-art label inference attack compared with baselines. Code is available at \url{https://github.com/jorghyq2016/FedHSSL}.

Regulatory bodies worldwide are intensifying their efforts to ensure transparency in influencer marketing on social media through instruments like the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD) in the European Union, or Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act. Yet enforcing these obligations has proven to be highly problematic due to the sheer scale of the influencer market. The task of automatically detecting sponsored content aims to enable the monitoring and enforcement of such regulations at scale. Current research in this field primarily frames this problem as a machine learning task, focusing on developing models that achieve high classification performance in detecting ads. These machine learning tasks rely on human data annotation to provide ground truth information. However, agreement between annotators is often low, leading to inconsistent labels that hinder the reliability of models. To improve annotation accuracy and, thus, the detection of sponsored content, we propose using chatGPT to augment the annotation process with phrases identified as relevant features and brief explanations. Our experiments show that this approach consistently improves inter-annotator agreement and annotation accuracy. Additionally, our survey of user experience in the annotation task indicates that the explanations improve the annotators' confidence and streamline the process. Our proposed methods can ultimately lead to more transparency and alignment with regulatory requirements in sponsored content detection.

With significant advances in generative AI, new technologies are rapidly being deployed with generative components. Generative models are typically trained on large datasets, resulting in model behaviors that can mimic the worst of the content in the training data. Responsible deployment of generative technologies requires content moderation strategies, such as safety input and output filters. Here, we provide a theoretical framework for conceptualizing responsible content moderation of text-to-image generative technologies, including a demonstration of how to empirically measure the constructs we enumerate. We define and distinguish the concepts of safety, fairness, and metric equity, and enumerate example harms that can come in each domain. We then provide a demonstration of how the defined harms can be quantified. We conclude with a summary of how the style of harms quantification we demonstrate enables data-driven content moderation decisions.

This paper presents novel experiments shedding light on the shortcomings of current metrics for assessing biases of gender discrimination made by machine learning algorithms on textual data. We focus on the Bios dataset, and our learning task is to predict the occupation of individuals, based on their biography. Such prediction tasks are common in commercial Natural Language Processing (NLP) applications such as automatic job recommendations. We address an important limitation of theoretical discussions dealing with group-wise fairness metrics: they focus on large datasets, although the norm in many industrial NLP applications is to use small to reasonably large linguistic datasets for which the main practical constraint is to get a good prediction accuracy. We then question how reliable are different popular measures of bias when the size of the training set is simply sufficient to learn reasonably accurate predictions. Our experiments sample the Bios dataset and learn more than 200 models on different sample sizes. This allows us to statistically study our results and to confirm that common gender bias indices provide diverging and sometimes unreliable results when applied to relatively small training and test samples. This highlights the crucial importance of variance calculations for providing sound results in this field.

Image anonymization is widely adapted in practice to comply with privacy regulations in many regions. However, anonymization often degrades the quality of the data, reducing its utility for computer vision development. In this paper, we investigate the impact of image anonymization for training computer vision models on key computer vision tasks (detection, instance segmentation, and pose estimation). Specifically, we benchmark the recognition drop on common detection datasets, where we evaluate both traditional and realistic anonymization for faces and full bodies. Our comprehensive experiments reflect that traditional image anonymization substantially impacts final model performance, particularly when anonymizing the full body. Furthermore, we find that realistic anonymization can mitigate this decrease in performance, where our experiments reflect a minimal performance drop for face anonymization. Our study demonstrates that realistic anonymization can enable privacy-preserving computer vision development with minimal performance degradation across a range of important computer vision benchmarks.

Accurately measuring discrimination is crucial to faithfully assessing fairness of trained machine learning (ML) models. Any bias in measuring discrimination leads to either amplification or underestimation of the existing disparity. Several sources of bias exist and it is assumed that bias resulting from machine learning is born equally by different groups (e.g. females vs males, whites vs blacks, etc.). If, however, bias is born differently by different groups, it may exacerbate discrimination against specific sub-populations. Sampling bias, is inconsistently used in the literature to describe bias due to the sampling procedure. In this paper, we attempt to disambiguate this term by introducing clearly defined variants of sampling bias, namely, sample size bias (SSB) and underrepresentation bias (URB). We show also how discrimination can be decomposed into variance, bias, and noise. Finally, we challenge the commonly accepted mitigation approach that discrimination can be addressed by collecting more samples of the underrepresented group.

We present Queer in AI as a case study for community-led participatory design in AI. We examine how participatory design and intersectional tenets started and shaped this community's programs over the years. We discuss different challenges that emerged in the process, look at ways this organization has fallen short of operationalizing participatory and intersectional principles, and then assess the organization's impact. Queer in AI provides important lessons and insights for practitioners and theorists of participatory methods broadly through its rejection of hierarchy in favor of decentralization, success at building aid and programs by and for the queer community, and effort to change actors and institutions outside of the queer community. Finally, we theorize how communities like Queer in AI contribute to the participatory design in AI more broadly by fostering cultures of participation in AI, welcoming and empowering marginalized participants, critiquing poor or exploitative participatory practices, and bringing participation to institutions outside of individual research projects. Queer in AI's work serves as a case study of grassroots activism and participatory methods within AI, demonstrating the potential of community-led participatory methods and intersectional praxis, while also providing challenges, case studies, and nuanced insights to researchers developing and using participatory methods.