Interpretable machine learning offers insights into what factors drive a certain prediction of a black-box system. A large number of interpreting methods focus on identifying explanatory input features, which generally fall into two main categories: attribution and selection. A popular attribution-based approach is to exploit local neighborhoods for learning instance-specific explainers in an additive manner. The process is thus inefficient and susceptible to poorly-conditioned samples. However, they can only interpret single-class predictions and many suffer from inconsistency across different settings, due to a strict reliance on a pre-defined number of features selected. This work exploits the strengths of both methods and proposes a framework for learning local explanations simultaneously for multiple target classes. Our model explainer significantly outperforms additive and instance-wise counterparts on faithfulness with more compact and comprehensible explanations. We also demonstrate the capacity to select stable and important features through extensive experiments on various data sets and black-box model architectures. Black-box machine learning systems enjoy a remarkable predictive performance at the cost of interpretability. This trade-off has motivated a number of interpreting approaches for explaining the behavior of these complex models. Such explanations are particularly useful for high-stakes applications such as healthcare (Caruana et al., 2015; Rich, 2016), cybersecurity (Nguyen et al., 2021) or criminal investigation (Lipton, 2018). While model interpretation can be done in various ways (Mothilal et al., 2020; Bodria et al., 2021), our discussion will focus on feature importance or saliency-based approach - that is, to assign relative importance weights to individual features w.r.t the model's prediction on an input example. Features here refer to input components interpretable to humans; for high-dimensional data such as texts or images, features can be a bag of words/phrases or a group of pixels/super-pixels (Ribeiro et al., 2016). Explanations are generally made by selecting top K features with the highest weights, signifying K most important features to a black-box's decision.

The Right to Explanation and the Right to be Forgotten are two important principles outlined to regulate algorithmic decision making and data usage in real-world applications. While the right to explanation allows individuals to request an actionable explanation for an algorithmic decision, the right to be forgotten grants them the right to ask for their data to be deleted from all the databases and models of an organization. Intuitively, enforcing the right to be forgotten may trigger model updates which in turn invalidate previously provided explanations, thus violating the right to explanation. In this work, we investigate the technical implications arising due to the interference between the two aforementioned regulatory principles, and propose the first algorithmic framework to resolve the tension between them. To this end, we formulate a novel optimization problem to generate explanations that are robust to model updates due to the removal of training data instances by data deletion requests. We then derive an efficient approximation algorithm to handle the combinatorial complexity of this optimization problem. We theoretically demonstrate that our method generates explanations that are provably robust to worst-case data deletion requests with bounded costs in case of linear models and certain classes of non-linear models. Extensive experimentation with real-world datasets demonstrates the efficacy of the proposed framework.

Local governments increasingly use artificial intelligence (AI) for automated decision-making. Contestability, making systems responsive to dispute, is a way to ensure they respect human rights to autonomy and dignity. We investigate the design of public urban AI systems for contestability through the example of camera cars: human-driven vehicles equipped with image sensors. Applying a provisional framework for contestable AI, we use speculative design to create a concept video of a contestable camera car. Using this concept video, we then conduct semi-structured interviews with 17 civil servants who work with AI employed by a large northwestern European city. The resulting data is analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis to identify the main challenges facing the implementation of contestability in public AI. We describe how civic participation faces issues of representation, public AI systems should integrate with existing democratic practices, and cities must expand capacities for responsible AI development and operation.

Specialised pre-trained language models are becoming more frequent in NLP since they can potentially outperform models trained on generic texts. BioBERT (Sanh et al., 2019) and BioClinicalBERT (Alsentzer et al., 2019) are two examples of such models that have shown promise in medical NLP tasks. Many of these models are overparametrised and resource-intensive, but thanks to techniques like Knowledge Distillation (KD), it is possible to create smaller versions that perform almost as well as their larger counterparts. In this work, we specifically focus on development of compact language models for processing clinical texts (i.e. We developed a number of efficient lightweight clinical transformers using knowledge distillation and continual learning, with the number of parameters ranging from 15 million to 65 million. These models performed comparably to larger models such as BioBERT and ClinicalBioBERT and significantly outperformed other compact models trained on general or biomedical data. Our extensive evaluation was done across several standard datasets and covered a wide range of clinical text-mining tasks, including Natural Language Inference, Relation Extraction, Named Entity Recognition, and Sequence Classification. To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive study specifically focused on creating efficient and compact transformers for clinical NLP tasks. The models and code used in this study can be found on our Huggingface profile at https: //huggingface.co/nlpie and Github page at https://github.com/ Large language models pre-trained on generic texts serve as the foundation upon which most stateof-the-art NLP models are built. There is ample evidence that, for certain domains and downstream tasks, models that are pre-trained on specialised data outperform baselines that have only relied on generic texts (Sanh et al., 2019; Alsentzer et al., 2019; Beltagy et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2020; Chalkidis et al., 2020).

Proponents of explainable AI have often argued that it constitutes an essential path towards algorithmic fairness. Prior works examining these claims have primarily evaluated explanations based on their effects on humans' perceptions, but there is scant research on the relationship between explanations and distributive fairness of AI-assisted decisions. In this paper, we conduct an empirical study to examine the relationship between feature-based explanations and distributive fairness, mediated by human perceptions and reliance on AI recommendations. Our findings show that explanations influence fairness perceptions, which, in turn, relate to humans' tendency to adhere to AI recommendations. However, our findings suggest that such explanations do not enable humans to discern correct and wrong AI recommendations. Instead, we show that they may affect reliance irrespective of the correctness of AI recommendations. Depending on which features an explanation highlights, this can foster or hinder distributive fairness: when explanations highlight features that are task-irrelevant and evidently associated with the sensitive attribute, this prompts overrides that counter stereotype-aligned AI recommendations. Meanwhile, if explanations appear task-relevant, this induces reliance behavior that reinforces stereotype-aligned errors. These results show that feature-based explanations are not a reliable mechanism to improve distributive fairness, as their ability to do so relies on a human-in-the-loop operationalization of the flawed notion of "fairness through unawareness". Finally, our study design provides a blueprint to evaluate the suitability of other explanations as pathways towards improved distributive fairness of AI-assisted decisions.

The release of toxic gases by industries, emissions from vehicles, and an increase in the concentration of harmful gases and particulate matter in the atmosphere are all contributing factors to the deterioration of the quality of the air. Factors such as industries, urbanization, population growth, and the increased use of vehicles contribute to the rapid increase in pollution levels, which can adversely impact human health. This paper presents a model for forecasting the air quality index in Nigeria using the Bi-directional LSTM model. The air pollution data was downloaded from an online database (UCL). The dataset was pre-processed using both pandas tools in python. The pre-processed result was used as input features in training a Bi-LSTM model in making future forecasts of the values of the particulate matter Pm2.5, and Pm10. The Bi-LSTM model was evaluated using some evaluation parameters such as mean square error, mean absolute error, absolute mean square, and R^2 square. The result of the Bi-LSTM shows a mean square error of 52.99%, relative mean square error of 7.28%, mean absolute error of 3.4%, and R^2 square of 97%. The model. This shows that the model follows a seamless trend in forecasting the air quality in Port Harcourt, Nigeria.

Why should moral philosophers, moral psychologists, and machine ethicists care about computational complexity? Debates on whether artificial intelligence (AI) can or should be used to solve problems in ethical domains have mainly been driven by what AI can or cannot do in terms of human capacities. In this paper, we tackle the problem from the other end by exploring what kind of moral machines are possible based on what computational systems can or cannot do. To do so, we analyze normative ethics through the lens of computational complexity. First, we introduce computational complexity for the uninitiated reader and discuss how the complexity of ethical problems can be framed within Marr's three levels of analysis. We then study a range of ethical problems based on consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, with the aim of elucidating the complexity associated with the problems themselves (e.g., due to combinatorics, uncertainty, strategic dynamics), the computational methods employed (e.g., probability, logic, learning), and the available resources (e.g., time, knowledge, learning). The results indicate that most problems the normative frameworks pose lead to tractability issues in every category analyzed. Our investigation also provides several insights about the computational nature of normative ethics, including the differences between rule- and outcome-based moral strategies, and the implementation-variance with regard to moral resources. We then discuss the consequences complexity results have for the prospect of moral machines in virtue of the trade-off between optimality and efficiency. Finally, we elucidate how computational complexity can be used to inform both philosophical and cognitive-psychological research on human morality by advancing the Moral Tractability Thesis (MTT).

Recently, Language Models (LMs) instruction-tuned on multiple tasks, also known as multitask-prompted fine-tuning (MT), have shown the capability to generalize to unseen tasks. Previous work has shown that scaling the number of training tasks is the key component in making stronger MT LMs. In this work, we report an unexpected finding that an expert LM fine-tuned on just a single task can outperform an MT LM trained with 300+ different tasks on 11 different unseen datasets and on 13 datasets of the BIG-bench benchmark by a mean accuracy of 3.20% and 1.29%, respectively. This finding casts doubt on the previously held belief that simply scaling the number of tasks makes stronger MT LMs. Leveraging this finding, we further show that this distributed approach of training a separate expert LM per training task instead of a single MT LM for zero-shot inference possesses many benefits including (1) avoiding negative task transfer that often occurs during instruction tuning, (2) being able to continually learn new tasks without having to re-train on previous tasks to avoid catastrophic forgetting, and (3) showing compositional capabilities when merging individual experts together. The code is available at https://github.com/joeljang/ELM.

Regulations and standards in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) are necessary to minimise risks and maximise benefits, yet some argue that they stifle innovation. This paper critically examines the idea that regulation stifles innovation in the field of AI. Current trends in AI regulation, particularly the proposed European AI Act and the standards supporting its implementation, are discussed. Arguments in support of the idea that regulation stifles innovation are analysed and criticised, and an alternative point of view is offered, showing how regulation and standards can foster innovation in the field of AI.

Event prediction is the ability of anticipating future events, i.e., future real-world occurrences, and aims to support the user in deciding on actions that change future events towards a desired state. An event prediction method learns the relation between features of past events and future events. It is applied to newly observed events to predict corresponding future events that are evaluated with respect to the user's desired future state. If the predicted future events do not comply with this state, actions are taken towards achieving desirable future states. Evidently, event prediction is valuable in many application domains such as business and natural disasters. The diversity of application domains results in a diverse range of methods that are scattered across various research areas which, in turn, use different terminology for event prediction methods. Consequently, sharing methods and knowledge for developing future event prediction methods is restricted. To facilitate knowledge sharing on account of a comprehensive classification, integration, and assessment of event prediction methods, we combine taxonomies and take a systems perspective to integrate event prediction methods into a single system, elicit requirements and assess existing work with respect to the requirements. Based on the assessment, we identify open challenges and discuss future research directions.