Violence, whether it is focused on individuals such as crime or at larger scales such as war, seems to be almost inevitable in our world. However, researchers are asking if it can be prevented and if geospatial big data techniques, including machine learning methods, could potentially be used to prevent violence from going out of control. A recent World Economic Form blog has highlighted varied efforts that attempt to mitigate violence at different scales, with geospatial data often a core feature of different methods discussed in these tools.[1] Two tools have been recently developed that focus on small-scale acts of violence and harassment. Using crowdsourcing and hot spot mapping, Safecity and HarassMap[2] have been created, which depict recent trends of assaults, sexual harassment, and local crime to help individuals determine areas to avoid.

An important problem in causal inference is to break down the total effect of treatment into different causal pathways and quantify the causal effect in each pathway. Causal mediation analysis (CMA) is a formal statistical approach for identifying and estimating these causal effects. Central to CMA is the sequential ignorability assumption that implies all pre-treatment confounders are measured and they can capture different types of confounding, e.g., post-treatment confounders and hidden confounders. Typically unverifiable in observational studies, this assumption restrains both the coverage and practicality of conventional methods. This work, therefore, aims to circumvent the stringent assumption by following a causal graph with a unified confounder and its proxy variables. Our core contribution is an algorithm that combines deep latent-variable models and proxy strategy to jointly infer a unified surrogate confounder and estimate different causal effects in CMA from observed variables. Empirical evaluations using both synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets validate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

Algorithmic risk assessments hold the promise of greatly advancing accurate decision-making, but in practice, multiple real-world examples have been shown to distribute errors disproportionately across demographic groups. In this paper, we characterize why error disparities arise in the first place. We show that predictive uncertainty often leads classifiers to systematically disadvantage groups with lower-mean outcomes, assigning them smaller true and false positive rates than their higher-mean counterparts. This can occur even when prediction is group-blind. We prove that to avoid these error imbalances, individuals in lower-mean groups must either be over-represented among positive classifications or be assigned more accurate predictions than those in higher-mean groups. We focus on the latter condition as a solution to bridge error rate divides and show that data acquisition for low-mean groups can increase access to opportunity. We call the strategy "affirmative information" and compare it to traditional affirmative action in the classification task of identifying creditworthy borrowers.

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) suffer from a rapid decrease in performance when trained on a sequence of tasks where only data of the most recent task is available. This phenomenon, known as catastrophic forgetting, prevents DNNs from accumulating knowledge over time. Overcoming catastrophic forgetting and enabling continual learning is of great interest since it would enable the application of DNNs in settings where unrestricted access to all the training data at any time is not always possible, e.g. due to storage limitations or legal issues. While many recently proposed methods for continual learning use some training examples for rehearsal, their performance strongly depends on the number of stored examples. In order to improve performance of rehearsal for continual learning, especially for a small number of stored examples, we propose a novel way of learning a small set of synthetic examples which capture the essence of a complete dataset. Instead of directly learning these synthetic examples, we learn a weighted combination of shared components for each example that enables a significant increase in memory efficiency. We demonstrate the performance of our method on commonly used datasets and compare it to recently proposed related methods and baselines.

"We are investigating the case for publishing or circulating any statement, rumour or report with intent to cause fear or alarm to the public, sharing offensive or menacing content, and prostitution," police chief Fadzil Ahmat said according to the Straits Times website.

Unsupervised learning seeks to uncover patterns in data. However, different kinds of noise may impede the discovery of useful substructure from real-world time-series data. In this work, we focus on mitigating the interference of left-censorship in the task of clustering. We provide conditions under which clusters and left-censorship may be identified; motivated by this result, we develop a deep generative, continuous-time model of time-series data that clusters while correcting for censorship time. We demonstrate accurate, stable, and interpretable results on synthetic data that outperform several benchmarks. To showcase the utility of our framework on real-world problems, we study how left-censorship can adversely affect the task of disease phenotyping, resulting in the often incorrect assumption that longitudinal patient data are aligned by disease stage. In reality, patients at the time of diagnosis are at different stages of the disease -- both late and early due to differences in when patients seek medical care and such discrepancy can confound unsupervised learning algorithms. On two clinical datasets, our model corrects for this form of censorship and recovers known clinical subtypes.

Yet, OpenAI's GPT-2 language model does know how to reach a certain Peter W-- (name redacted for privacy). When prompted with a short snippet of Internet text, the model accurately generates Peter's contact information, including his work address, email, phone, and fax: In our recent paper, we evaluate how large language models memorize and regurgitate such rare snippets of their training data. We focus on GPT-2 and find that at least 0.1% of its text generations (a very conservative estimate) contain long verbatim strings that are "copy-pasted" from a document in its training set. Such memorization would be an obvious issue for language models that are trained on private data, e.g., on users' emails, as the model might inadvertently output a user's sensitive conversations. Regular readers of the BAIR blog may be familiar with the issue of data memorization in language models.

Argumentation provides a representation of arguments and attacks between these arguments. Argumentation can be used to represent a reasoning process over evidence to reach conclusions. Within such a reasoning process, understanding the value of information can improve the quality of decision making based on the output of the reasoning process. The value of an item of information is inherently dependent on the available evidence and the question being answered by the reasoning. In this paper we introduce a value of information on argument frameworks to identify the most valuable arguments within the finite set of arguments in the framework, and the arguments and attacks which could be added to change the output of an evaluation. We demonstrate the value of information within an argument framework representing an intelligence analysis in the maritime domain. Understanding the value of information in an intelligence analysis will allow analysts to balance the value against the costs and risks of collection, to effectively request further collection of intelligence to increase the confidence in the analysis of hypotheses.

To implement fair machine learning in a sustainable way, identifying the right fairness definition is key. However, fairness is a concept of justice, and various definitions exist. Some of them are in conflict with each other and there is no uniformly accepted notion of fairness. The most appropriate fairness definition for an artificial intelligence system is often a matter of application and the right choice depends on ethical standards and legal requirements. In the absence of officially binding rules, the objective of this document is to structure the complex landscape of existing fairness definitions. We propose the "Fairness Compass", a tool which formalises the selection process and makes identifying the most appropriate fairness metric for a given system a simple, straightforward procedure. We further argue that documenting the reasoning behind the respective decisions in the course of this process can help to build trust from the user through explaining and justifying the implemented fairness.

Imagine an app on your phone or computer that can tell if you are being dishonest, just by processing affective features of your facial expressions, body movements, and voice. People could ask about your political preferences, your sexual orientation, and immediately determine which of your responses are honest and which are not. In this paper we argue why artificial intelligence-based, non-invasive lie detection technologies are likely to experience a rapid advancement in the coming years, and that it would be irresponsible to wait any longer before discussing its implications. Legal and popular perspectives are reviewed to evaluate the potential for these technologies to cause societal harm. To understand the perspective of a reasonable person, we conducted a survey of 129 individuals, and identified consent and accuracy as the major factors in their decision-making process regarding the use of these technologies. In our analysis, we distinguish two types of lie detection technology, accurate truth metering and accurate thought exposing. We generally find that truth metering is already largely within the scope of existing US federal and state laws, albeit with some notable exceptions. In contrast, we find that current regulation of thought exposing technologies is ambiguous and inadequate to safeguard civil liberties. In order to rectify these shortcomings, we introduce the legal concept of mental trespass and use this concept as the basis for proposed regulation.