The pervasiveness of large language models and generative AI in online media has amplified the need for effective automated fact-checking to assist fact-checkers in tackling the increasing volume and sophistication of misinformation. The complex nature of fact-checking demands that automated fact-checking systems provide explanations that enable fact-checkers to scrutinise their outputs. However, it is unclear how these explanations should align with the decision-making and reasoning processes of fact-checkers to be effectively integrated into their workflows. Through semi-structured interviews with fact-checking professionals, we bridge this gap by: (i) providing an account of how fact-checkers assess evidence, make decisions, and explain their processes; (ii) examining how fact-checkers use automated tools in practice; and (iii) identifying fact-checker explanation requirements for automated fact-checking tools. The findings show unmet explanation needs and identify important criteria for replicable fact-checking explanations that trace the model's reasoning path, reference specific evidence, and highlight uncertainty and information gaps.

Explainability is important for the transparency of autonomous and intelligent systems and for helping to support the development of appropriate levels of trust. There has been considerable work on developing approaches for explaining systems and there are standards that specify requirements for transparency. However, there is a gap: the standards are too high-level and do not adequately specify requirements for explainability. This paper develops a scoresheet that can be used to specify explainability requirements or to assess the explainability aspects provided for particular applications. The scoresheet is developed by considering the requirements of a range of stakeholders and is applicable to Multiagent Systems as well as other AI technologies. We also provide guidance for how to use the scoresheet and illustrate its generality and usefulness by applying it to a range of applications.

The development of fair and unbiased machine learning models remains an ongoing objective for researchers in the field of artificial intelligence. We introduce the Differential Adjusted Parity (DAP) loss to produce unbiased informative representations. It utilises a differentiable variant of the adjusted parity metric to create a unified objective function. By combining downstream task classification accuracy and its inconsistency across sensitive feature domains, it provides a single tool to increase performance and mitigate bias. A key element in this approach is the use of soft balanced accuracies. In contrast to previous non-adversarial approaches, DAP does not suffer a degeneracy where the metric is satisfied by performing equally poorly across all sensitive domains. It outperforms several adversarial models on downstream task accuracy and fairness in our analysis. Specifically, it improves the demographic parity, equalized odds and sensitive feature accuracy by as much as 22.5\%, 44.1\% and 40.1\%, respectively, when compared to the best performing adversarial approaches on these metrics. Overall, the DAP loss and its associated metric can play a significant role in creating more fair machine learning models.

This paper addresses the challenge of forecasting corporate distress, a problem marked by three key statistical hurdles: (i) right censoring, (ii) high-dimensional predictors, and (iii) mixed-frequency data. To overcome these complexities, we introduce a novel high-dimensional censored MIDAS (Mixed Data Sampling) logistic regression. Our approach handles censoring through inverse probability weighting and achieves accurate estimation with numerous mixed-frequency predictors by employing a sparse-group penalty. We establish finite-sample bounds for the estimation error, accounting for censoring, the MIDAS approximation error, and heavy tails. The superior performance of the method is demonstrated through Monte Carlo simulations. Finally, we present an extensive application of our methodology to predict the financial distress of Chinese-listed firms. Our novel procedure is implemented in the R package 'Survivalml'.

Evaluating the open-ended text generation of large language models (LLMs) is challenging because of the lack of a clear ground truth and the high cost of human or LLM-based assessments. We propose a novel benchmark that evaluates LLMs using n-gram statistics and rules, without relying on human judgement or LLM-as-a-judge approaches. Using 50 question and reference answer sets, we introduce three new metrics based on n-grams and rules: Fluency, Truthfulness, and Helpfulness. Our benchmark strongly correlates with GPT-4o-based evaluations while requiring significantly fewer computational resources, demonstrating its effectiveness as a scalable alternative for assessing LLMs' open-ended generation capabilities.

Machine learning models can inadvertently expose confidential properties of their training data, making them vulnerable to membership inference attacks (MIA). While numerous evaluation methods exist, many require computationally expensive processes, such as training multiple shadow models. This article presents two new complementary approaches for efficiently identifying vulnerable tree-based models: an ante-hoc analysis of hyperparameter choices and a post-hoc examination of trained model structure. While these new methods cannot certify whether a model is safe from MIA, they provide practitioners with a means to significantly reduce the number of models that need to undergo expensive MIA assessment through a hierarchical filtering approach. More specifically, it is shown that the rank order of disclosure risk for different hyperparameter combinations remains consistent across datasets, enabling the development of simple, human-interpretable rules for identifying relatively high-risk models before training. While this ante-hoc analysis cannot determine absolute safety since this also depends on the specific dataset, it allows the elimination of unnecessarily risky configurations during hyperparameter tuning. Additionally, computationally inexpensive structural metrics serve as indicators of MIA vulnerability, providing a second filtering stage to identify risky models after training but before conducting expensive attacks. Empirical results show that hyperparameter-based risk prediction rules can achieve high accuracy in predicting the most at risk combinations of hyperparameters across different tree-based model types, while requiring no model training. Moreover, target model accuracy is not seen to correlate with privacy risk, suggesting opportunities to optimise model configurations for both performance and privacy.

Group max-min fairness (MMF) is commonly used in fairness-aware recommender systems (RS) as an optimization objective, as it aims to protect marginalized item groups and ensures a fair competition platform. However, our theoretical analysis indicates that integrating MMF constraint violates the assumption of sample independence during optimization, causing the loss function to deviate from linear additivity. Such nonlinearity property introduces the Jensen gap between the model's convergence point and the optimal point if mini-batch sampling is applied. Both theoretical and empirical studies show that as the mini-batch size decreases and the group size increases, the Jensen gap will widen accordingly. Some methods using heuristic re-weighting or debiasing strategies have the potential to bridge the Jensen gap. However, they either lack theoretical guarantees or suffer from heavy computational costs. To overcome these limitations, we first theoretically demonstrate that the MMF-constrained objective can be essentially reformulated as a group-weighted optimization objective. Then we present an efficient and effective algorithm named FairDual, which utilizes a dual optimization technique to minimize the Jensen gap. Our theoretical analysis demonstrates that FairDual can achieve a sub-linear convergence rate to the globally optimal solution and the Jensen gap can be well bounded under a mini-batch sampling strategy with random shuffle. Extensive experiments conducted using six large-scale RS backbone models on three publicly available datasets demonstrate that FairDual outperforms all baselines in terms of both accuracy and fairness. Our data and codes are shared at https://github.com/XuChen0427/FairDual.

Books, while often rich in cultural insights, can also mirror societal biases of their eras - biases that Large Language Models (LLMs) may learn and perpetuate during training. We introduce a novel method to trace and quantify these biases using fine-tuned LLMs. We develop BookPAGE, a corpus comprising 593 fictional books across seven decades (1950-2019), to track bias evolution. By fine-tuning LLMs on books from each decade and using targeted prompts, we examine shifts in biases related to gender, sexual orientation, race, and religion. Our findings indicate that LLMs trained on decade-specific books manifest biases reflective of their times, with both gradual trends and notable shifts. For example, model responses showed a progressive increase in the portrayal of women in leadership roles (from 8% to 22%) from the 1950s to 2010s, with a significant uptick in the 1990s (from 4% to 12%), possibly aligning with third-wave feminism. Same-sex relationship references increased markedly from the 1980s to 2000s (from 0% to 10%), mirroring growing LGBTQ+ visibility. Concerningly, negative portrayals of Islam rose sharply in the 2000s (26% to 38%), likely reflecting post-9/11 sentiments. Importantly, we demonstrate that these biases stem mainly from the books' content and not the models' architecture or initial training. Our study offers a new perspective on societal bias trends by bridging AI, literary studies, and social science research.

Legal documents including judgments and court orders require highly sophisticated legal knowledge for understanding. To disclose expert knowledge for non-experts, we explore the problem of visualizing legal texts with easy-to-understand diagrams and propose a novel dataset of LegalViz with 23 languages and 7,010 cases of legal document and visualization pairs, using the DOT graph description language of Graphviz. LegalViz provides a simple diagram from a complicated legal corpus identifying legal entities, transactions, legal sources, and statements at a glance, that are essential in each judgment. In addition, we provide new evaluation metrics for the legal diagram visualization by considering graph structures, textual similarities, and legal contents. We conducted empirical studies on few-shot and finetuning large language models for generating legal diagrams and evaluated them with these metrics, including legal content-based evaluation within 23 languages. Models trained with LegalViz outperform existing models including GPTs, confirming the effectiveness of our dataset.

Large language models (LLMs), both proprietary and open-source, have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across various natural language processing tasks. However, they face significant limitations in legal reasoning tasks. Proprietary models introduce data privacy risks and high inference costs, while open-source models underperform due to insufficient legal domain training data. To address these limitations, we study data generation for legal reasoning to improve the legal reasoning performance of open-source LLMs with the help of proprietary LLMs. This is challenging due to the lack of legal knowledge in proprietary LLMs and the difficulty in verifying the generated data. We propose KgDG, a knowledge-guided data generation framework for legal reasoning. Our framework enables leveraging legal knowledge to enhance generation diversity and introduces a refinement and verification process to ensure the quality of generated data. Moreover, we expand the generated dataset to further enhance the LLM reasoning capabilities. Using KgDG, we create a synthetic legal reasoning dataset containing 50K high-quality examples. Our trained model LawGPT outperforms existing legal-specific LLMs and achieves performance comparable to proprietary LLMs, demonstrating the effectiveness of KgDG and LawGPT. Our code and resources is publicly available at https://github.com/LAMDASZ-ML/Knowledge-Guide-Data-Generation .