The main objective of explanations is to transmit knowledge to humans. This work proposes to construct informative explanations for predictions made from machine learning models. Motivated by the observations from social sciences, our approach selects data points from the training sample that exhibit special characteristics crucial for explanation, for instance, ones contrastive to the classification prediction and ones representative of the models. Subsequently, semantic concepts are derived from the selected data points through the use of domain ontologies. These concepts are filtered and ranked to produce informative explanations that improves human understanding. The main features of our approach are that (1) knowledge about explanations is captured in the form of ontological concepts, (2) explanations include contrastive evidences in addition to normal evidences, and (3) explanations are user relevant.

Society's operating system needs an upgrade. The model we have been using is simply not up to the challenges of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. A new era is unfolding at breakneck speed. It has huge potential to address some of the world's most critical challenges, from food security, to reducing congestion in big cities, to increasing energy efficiency, to accelerating cures to the most intractable diseases. But it also raises a host of social and governance issues that need addressing.

Do you have a right to know if you're talking to a bot? Does it have the right to keep that information from you? Those questions have been stirring in the minds of many since well before Google demoed Duplex, a human-like AI that makes phone calls on a user's behalf, earlier this month. Bots -- online accounts that appear to be controlled by a human, but are actually powered by AI -- are now prevalent all across the internet, specifically on social media sites. While some people think legally forcing these bots to "out" themselves as non-human would be beneficial, others think doing so violates the bot's right to free speech.

NEW YORK – Tesla Inc. on Thursday reached an agreement to settle a class-action lawsuit with buyers of its Model S and Model X cars who alleged that the company's assisted-driving Autopilot system was "essentially unusable and demonstrably dangerous." The lawsuit said Tesla misrepresented on its website that the cars came with capabilities designed to make highway driving "safer." The Tesla owners said they paid an extra $5,000 to have their cars equipped with the Autopilot software with additional safety features such as automated emergency braking and side collision warning. The features were "completely inoperable," according to the complaint. Under the proposed agreement, class members, who paid to get the Autopilot upgrade between 2016 and 2017, will receive between $20 and $280 in compensation.

A couple in Portland, Ore., discovered that their Amazon Echo had recorded their conversation and sent it to one of their contacts. A couple in Portland, Ore., discovered that their Amazon Echo had recorded their conversation and sent it to one of their contacts. As secret recordings go, the Portland couple's conversation was pretty mundane: They were talking about hardwood floors. But their Amazon Echo was listening and recording their discussion. The device then sent the recording to someone in their contacts -- without the couple's knowledge.

For the 7,000 people in the audience for Google's (GOOG, GOOGL) I/O keynote last week, the Google Duplex demo was a mind-fryer. CEO Sundar Pichai had said to his phone, "OK Google, book me a haircut appointment on Tuesday between 10 a.m. and noon." And then, silently and invisibly (to him), Google Assistant had made a phone call to a human receptionist at the salon and had held a conversation, flawlessly impersonating an actual person, complete with "umms" and "ahhs." The receptionist never knew she'd been talking to AI. "That the many in Google did not erupt in utter panic and disgust at the first suggestion of this is incredible to me," tweeted Zeynep Tufekci, a University of North Carolina professor. "This is horrible and so obviously wrong. And on "CBS This Morning," Salesforce (CRM) CEO Marc Benioff spoke about it in the context of his call for a new, national privacy law. "That was the most amazing AI technology I've seen.

Tesla has agreed a class action lawsuit settlement with Model S and Model X owners who claimed the Autopilot feature was dangerous and "essentially unusable." A district judge still has to rubber stamp the settlement, which was filed at San Jose federal court Thursday, Reuters reports. Autopilot is said to increase safety through partial automation, though there have been a number of crashes. Two fatal collisions have occurred while Autopilot mode was on, along with a crash in which the driver said she was checking her phone while the feature was engaged. A report this month suggested Tesla omitted some Autopilot safeguards, including an eye-tracking feature to make sure drivers were paying attention, due to concerns over cost and effectiveness.

Tesla on Thursday reached an agreement to settle a class action lawsuit with buyers of its Model S and Model X cars who alleged that the company's assisted-driving Autopilot system was'essentially unusable and demonstrably dangerous.' The agreement, announced in a filing in San Jose federal court late Thursday, still has to be approved by U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman. Tesla said in a statement it wanted to do right by its customers and, as part of the proposed deal, agreed to compensate car owners who purchased the 2.0 version of Autopilot and had to wait longer than expected for the driving features to become active. Tesla-CEO Elon Musk speaks during the delivery of the first more reasonable Tesla vehicle Model 3 in Fremont. Two U.S. consumer advocacy groups urged the FTC to investigate what they called Tesla's'deceptive and misleading' use of the name Autopilot for its assisted-driving technology.

Every single day, the connected world creates 44 exabytes of new data--an amount equal to three million Libraries of Congress--that can be collected, stored, and analyzed. At the same time, artificial intelligence is being applied in new ways that are expected to transform virtually every sector. AI is transforming everything from finance, retail, and healthcare to national security and criminal justice. These rapid advances in technology and data analytics are having far-reaching consequences for jobs, the economy, society, and governance. In this situation, it is vital to think about the policy, legal, and ethical implications of the coming "digitalization of everything".

Artificial intelligence, cognitive computing, machine learning, data mining, natural language processing: The terminology surrounding the efforts to enhance how businesses access, sort and analyze the vast quantities of content being created every day is almost as vast as the content itself -- and no less confusing. The words are often used interchangeably, and while some have clear definitions, others do not. Claims that artificial intelligence (AI) will transform health care, law and "business" as a whole are rampant, but with the term left undefined, it is difficult to sort what is blue sky and what is real opportunity. With everything from smart homes to self-driving cars to chatbots being labeled as artificial intelligence, the conversation should really start with a clear working definition of what AI is and what it's not. Artificial intelligence, in the broadest sense, is the act of a machine solving a problem similar to the way a human would.