Cross-device federated learning (FL) has been well-studied from algorithmic, system scalability, and training speed perspectives. Nonetheless, moving from centralized training to cross-device FL for millions or billions of devices presents many risks, including performance loss, developer inertia, poor user experience, and unexpected application failures. In addition, the corresponding infrastructure, development costs, and return on investment are difficult to estimate. In this paper, we present a device-cloud collaborative FL platform that integrates with an existing machine learning platform, providing tools to measure real-world constraints, assess infrastructure capabilities, evaluate model training performance, and estimate system resource requirements to responsibly bring FL into production. We also present a decision workflow that leverages the FL-integrated platform to comprehensively evaluate the trade-offs of cross-device FL and share our empirical evaluations of business-critical machine learning applications that impact hundreds of millions of users.

Despite the large body of academic work on machine learning security, little is known about the occurrence of attacks on machine learning systems in the wild. In this paper, we report on a quantitative study with 139 industrial practitioners. We analyze attack occurrence and concern and evaluate statistical hypotheses on factors influencing threat perception and exposure. Our results shed light on real-world attacks on deployed machine learning. On the organizational level, while we find no predictors for threat exposure in our sample, the amount of implement defenses depends on exposure to threats or expected likelihood to become a target. We also provide a detailed analysis of practitioners' replies on the relevance of individual machine learning attacks, unveiling complex concerns like unreliable decision making, business information leakage, and bias introduction into models. Finally, we find that on the individual level, prior knowledge about machine learning security influences threat perception. Our work paves the way for more research about adversarial machine learning in practice, but yields also insights for regulation and auditing.

We study supervised learning problems for predicting properties of individuals who belong to one of two demographic groups, and we seek predictors that are fair according to statistical parity. This means that the distributions of the predictions within the two groups should be close with respect to the Kolmogorov distance, and fairness is achieved by penalizing the dissimilarity of these two distributions in the objective function of the learning problem. In this paper, we showcase conceptual and computational benefits of measuring unfairness with integral probability metrics (IPMs) other than the Kolmogorov distance. Conceptually, we show that the generator of any IPM can be interpreted as a family of utility functions and that unfairness with respect to this IPM arises if individuals in the two demographic groups have diverging expected utilities. We also prove that the unfairness-regularized prediction loss admits unbiased gradient estimators if unfairness is measured by the squared $\mathcal L^2$-distance or by a squared maximum mean discrepancy. In this case, the fair learning problem is susceptible to efficient stochastic gradient descent (SGD) algorithms. Numerical experiments on real data show that these SGD algorithms outperform state-of-the-art methods for fair learning in that they achieve superior accuracy-unfairness trade-offs -- sometimes orders of magnitude faster. Finally, we identify conditions under which statistical parity can improve prediction accuracy.

NBC News has discovered that Pinterest's recommendation algorithms are making it easier for pedophiles to create boards full of images of underage girls. After an initial search, Pinterest will start suggesting related searches that can easily be misused. The images themselves sometimes receive sexual comments. NBC notes that it didn't find child sexual abuse material (CSAM) during its investigation. However, the people creating the creepy boards sometimes had collections containing porn despite Pinterest's ban on that content.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is expanding rapidly. These technological breakthroughs present both opportunity and potential peril. AI technology offers great hope for increasing economic opportunity, boosting incomes, speeding life science research at reduced costs, and simplifying the lives of consumers. With so much potential for innovation, organizations investing in AI-oriented practices are already ramping up initiatives that boost productivity to remain competitive. Like most disruptive technologies, these investments can both create and displace jobs.

Not biased or compromised by historical baggage, personal relationships or having to worry about their next job. In September, Dictador – a global spirits company – got exactly this type of leader when they placed an AI in the CEO's chair.1 Teneo's 2023 global CEO and Investor Outlook Survey demonstrated a resounding interest in the future of AI by CEOs and the investors who empower their agenda as a strong area of big bets for innovative tech. Half (48%) of CEOs from the world's leading public companies have already adopted AI, with another 58% actively investing to strengthen their AI capabilities. These systems have brought the world of frictionless autonomous computing to the masses and are beginning to challenge the fundamental understanding of what computers can do and what it means to create anything, from executive speeches to works of art, from lines of code. The success of these platforms has sparked an arms race with Google, Microsoft and others racing to incorporate or duplicate these technologies within their core products.

Following the hype around OpenAI's ChatGPT conversational agent, the last straw in the recent development of Large Language Models (LLMs) that demonstrate emergent unprecedented zero-shot capabilities, we audit the latest OpenAI's GPT-3.5 model, `gpt-3.5-turbo', the first available ChatGPT model, in the LexGLUE benchmark in a zero-shot fashion providing examples in a templated instruction-following format. The results indicate that ChatGPT achieves an average micro-F1 score of 47.6% across LexGLUE tasks, surpassing the baseline guessing rates. Notably, the model performs exceptionally well in some datasets, achieving micro-F1 scores of 62.8% and 70.2% in the ECtHR B and LEDGAR datasets, respectively. The code base and model predictions are available for review on https://github.com/coastalcph/zeroshot_lexglue.

Large language models (LLMs) are used to generate content for a wide range of tasks, and are set to reach a growing audience in coming years due to integration in product interfaces like ChatGPT or search engines like Bing. This intensifies the need to ensure that models are aligned with human preferences and do not produce unsafe, inaccurate or toxic outputs. While alignment techniques like reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF) and red-teaming can mitigate some safety concerns and improve model capabilities, it is unlikely that an aggregate fine-tuning process can adequately represent the full range of users' preferences and values. Different people may legitimately disagree on their preferences for language and conversational norms, as well as on values or ideologies which guide their communication. Personalising LLMs through micro-level preference learning processes may result in models that are better aligned with each user. However, there are several normative challenges in defining the bounds of a societally-acceptable and safe degree of personalisation. In this paper, we ask how, and in what ways, LLMs should be personalised. First, we review literature on current paradigms for aligning LLMs with human feedback, and identify issues including (i) a lack of clarity regarding what alignment means; (ii) a tendency of technology providers to prescribe definitions of inherently subjective preferences and values; and (iii) a 'tyranny of the crowdworker', exacerbated by a lack of documentation in who we are really aligning to. Second, we present a taxonomy of benefits and risks associated with personalised LLMs, for individuals and society at large. Finally, we propose a three-tiered policy framework that allows users to experience the benefits of personalised alignment, while restraining unsafe and undesirable LLM-behaviours within (supra-)national and organisational bounds.

Despite widespread calls for transparent artificial intelligence systems, the term is too overburdened with disparate meanings to express precise policy aims or to orient concrete lines of research. Consequently, stakeholders often talk past each other, with policymakers expressing vague demands and practitioners devising solutions that may not address the underlying concerns. Part of why this happens is that a clear ideal of AI transparency goes unsaid in this body of work. We explicitly name such a north star -- transparency that is user-centered, user-appropriate, and honest. We conduct a broad literature survey, identifying many clusters of similar conceptions of transparency, tying each back to our north star with analysis of how it furthers or hinders our ideal AI transparency goals. We conclude with a discussion on common threads across all the clusters, to provide clearer common language whereby policymakers, stakeholders, and practitioners can communicate concrete demands and deliver appropriate solutions. We hope for future work on AI transparency that further advances confident, user-beneficial goals and provides clarity to regulators and developers alike.

Advancement in diffusion models, the latest cutting edge AI trend that generates a multitude of unique high-resolution images, has increased public interest in generative models massively. The Intellectual Property Rights surrounding artificial intelligence is a hot topic. There are also larger legal ramifications of the illegal use of images, movies, videos, etc in the creation of these models. Ongoing advancements to the use cases and data sources will extend deeper and further than just image and image generation, into the intellectual property rights surrounding individual information. Several standards groups have taken note and are working to create a more level playing field for consumers and businesses leveraging this technology.