Explainable AI (XAI) is critical for ensuring transparency, accountability, and trust in machine learning systems as black-box models are increasingly deployed within high-stakes domains. Among XAI methods, Shapley values are widely used for their fairness and consistency axioms. However, prevalent Shapley value approximation methods commonly rely on abstract baselines or computationally intensive calculations, which can limit their interpretability and scalability. To address such challenges, we propose Pairwise Shapley Values, a novel framework that grounds feature attributions in explicit, human-relatable comparisons between pairs of data instances proximal in feature space. Our method introduces pairwise reference selection combined with single-value imputation to deliver intuitive, model-agnostic explanations while significantly reducing computational overhead. Here, we demonstrate that Pairwise Shapley Values enhance interpretability across diverse regression and classification scenarios--including real estate pricing, polymer property prediction, and drug discovery datasets. We conclude that the proposed methods enable more transparent AI systems and advance the real-world applicability of XAI.

This article explores the concept of technological singularity and the factors that could accelerate or hinder its arrival. The butterfly effect is used as a framework to understand how seemingly small changes in complex systems can have significant and unpredictable outcomes. In section II, we discuss the various factors that could hasten the arrival of technological singularity, such as advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning, breakthroughs in quantum computing, progress in brain-computer interfaces and human augmentation, and development of nanotechnology and 3D printing. In section III, we examine the factors that could delay or impede the arrival of technological singularity, including technical limitations and setbacks in AI and machine learning, ethical and societal concerns around AI and its impact on jobs and privacy, lack of sufficient investment in research and development, and regulatory barriers and political instability. Section IV explores the interplay of these factors and how they can impact the butterfly effect. Finally, in the conclusion, we summarize the key points discussed and emphasize the importance of considering the butterfly effect in predicting the future of technology. We call for continued research and investment in technology to shape its future and mitigate potential risks.

The prediction of the Remaining Useful Life of aircraft engines is a critical area in high-reliability sectors such as aerospace and defense. Early failure predictions help ensure operational continuity, reduce maintenance costs, and prevent unexpected failures. Traditional regression models struggle with censored data, which can lead to biased predictions. Survival models, on the other hand, effectively handle censored data, improving predictive accuracy in maintenance processes. This paper introduces a novel approach based on the Rashomon perspective, which considers multiple models that achieve similar performance rather than relying on a single best model. This enables uncertainty quantification in survival probability predictions and enhances decision-making in predictive maintenance. The Rashomon survival curve was introduced to represent the range of survival probability estimates, providing insights into model agreement and uncertainty over time. The results on the CMAPSS dataset demonstrate that relying solely on a single model for RUL estimation may increase risk in some scenarios. The censoring levels significantly impact prediction uncertainty, with longer censoring times leading to greater variability in survival probabilities. These findings underscore the importance of incorporating model multiplicity in predictive maintenance frameworks to achieve more reliable and robust failure predictions. This paper contributes to uncertainty quantification in RUL prediction and highlights the Rashomon perspective as a powerful tool for predictive modeling.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in various domains but remain vulnerable to adversarial jailbreak attacks. Existing prompt-defense strategies, including parameter-modifying and parameter-free approaches, face limitations in adaptability, interpretability, and customization, constraining their effectiveness against evolving threats. To address these challenges, we propose ShieldLearner, a novel paradigm that mimics human learning in defense. Through trial and error, it autonomously distills attack signatures into a Pattern Atlas and synthesizes defense heuristics into a Meta-analysis Framework, enabling systematic and interpretable threat detection. Furthermore, we introduce Adaptive Adversarial Augmentation to generate adversarial variations of successfully defended prompts, enabling continuous self-improvement without model retraining. In addition to standard benchmarks, we create a hard test set by curating adversarial prompts from the Wildjailbreak dataset, emphasizing more concealed malicious intent. Experimental results show that ShieldLearner achieves a significantly higher defense success rate than existing baselines on both conventional and hard test sets, while also operating with lower computational overhead, making it a practical and efficient solution for real-world adversarial defense.

Bias issues of neural networks garner significant attention along with its promising advancement. Among various bias issues, mitigating two predominant biases is crucial in advancing fair and trustworthy AI: (1) ensuring neural networks yields even performance across demographic groups, and (2) ensuring algorithmic decision-making does not rely on protected attributes. However, upon the investigation of \pc papers in the relevant literature, we find that there exists a persistent, extensive but under-explored confusion regarding these two types of biases. Furthermore, the confusion has already significantly hampered the clarity of the community and subsequent development of debiasing methodologies. Thus, in this work, we aim to restore clarity by providing two mathematical definitions for these two predominant biases and leveraging these definitions to unify a comprehensive list of papers. Next, we highlight the common phenomena and the possible reasons for the existing confusion. To alleviate the confusion, we provide extensive experiments on synthetic, census, and image datasets, to validate the distinct nature of these biases, distinguish their different real-world manifestations, and evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive list of bias assessment metrics in assessing the mitigation of these biases. Further, we compare these two types of biases from multiple dimensions including the underlying causes, debiasing methods, evaluation protocol, prevalent datasets, and future directions. Last, we provide several suggestions aiming to guide researchers engaged in bias-related work to avoid confusion and further enhance clarity in the community.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are widely applied in various domains, the safety of LLMs is increasingly attracting attention to avoid their powerful capabilities being misused. Existing jailbreak methods create a forced instruction-following scenario, or search adversarial prompts with prefix or suffix tokens to achieve a specific representation manually or automatically. However, they suffer from low efficiency and explicit jailbreak patterns, far from the real deployment of mass attacks to LLMs. In this paper, we point out that simply rewriting the original instruction can achieve a jailbreak, and we find that this rewriting approach is learnable and transferable. We propose the Rewrite to Jailbreak (R2J) approach, a transferable black-box jailbreak method to attack LLMs by iteratively exploring the weakness of the LLMs and automatically improving the attacking strategy. The jailbreak is more efficient and hard to identify since no additional features are introduced. Extensive experiments and analysis demonstrate the effectiveness of R2J, and we find that the jailbreak is also transferable to multiple datasets and various types of models with only a few queries. We hope our work motivates further investigation of LLM safety.

Given the rapid development of Legal AI, a lot of attention has been paid to one of the most important legal AI tasks--similar case retrieval, especially with language models to use. In our paper, however, we try to improve the ranking performance of current models from the perspective of learning to rank instead of language models. Specifically, we conduct experiments using a pairwise method--RankSVM as the classifier to substitute a fully connected layer, combined with commonly used language models on similar case retrieval datasets LeCaRDv1 and LeCaRDv2. We finally come to the conclusion that RankSVM could generally help improve the retrieval performance on the LeCaRDv1 and LeCaRDv2 datasets compared with original classifiers by optimizing the precise ranking. It could also help mitigate overfitting owing to class imbalance. Our code is available in https://github.com/liuyuqi123study/RankSVM_for_SLR

Current unlearning methods for large language models usually rely on reverse optimization to reduce target token probabilities. However, this paradigm disrupts the subsequent tokens prediction, degrading model performance and linguistic coherence. Moreover, existing evaluation metrics overemphasize contextual forgetting while inadequately assessing response fluency and relevance. To address these challenges, we propose ReLearn, a data augmentation and fine-tuning pipeline for effective unlearning, along with a comprehensive evaluation framework. This framework introduces Knowledge Forgetting Rate (KFR) and Knowledge Retention Rate (KRR) to measure knowledge-level preservation, and Linguistic Score (LS) to evaluate generation quality. Our experiments show that ReLearn successfully achieves targeted forgetting while preserving high-quality output. Through mechanistic analysis, we further demonstrate how reverse optimization disrupts coherent text generation, while ReLearn preserves this essential capability. Code is available at https://github.com/zjunlp/unlearn.

Individuals from minority groups, even with equivalent qualifications, consistently receive fewer opportunities in critical areas such as employment, education, and healthcare. Yet, empirically demonstrating the existence of such pervasive bias, let alone measuring the extent of bias or correcting it, remains a significant challenge. Over several decades, researchers have utilized a range of experimental methodologies to test for biases in real-life situations (Bertrand and Duflo 2017). Audit studies, among the earliest of such methods, match two individuals who are similar in all respects except for sensitive characteristics like race, to test decision-makers' biases (Ayres and Siegelman 1995). A significant limitation of this method, however, is the inherent impossibility of achieving an exact match between two individuals, precluding perfect comparability (Heckman 1998). Correspondence studies have emerged as a predominant experimental approach for measuring biases (Guryan and Charles 2013, Bertrand and Mullainathan 2004). They create identical fictional profiles with manipulated attributes like race to assess differential treatment. However, these studies traditionally manipulate solely textual information, which may not reflect contemporary decision-making scenarios increasingly influenced by visual cues like facial images, as seen in recent hiring processes (Acquisti and Fong 2020, Ruffle and Shtudiner 2015). This reliance on text limits their effectiveness, as modern contexts often involve multimedia elements, making it challenging to measure real-world biases accurately or correct them based on such incomplete information (Armbruster et al. 2015).

Large language models (LLMs) offer powerful capabilities but come with significant environmental costs, particularly in carbon emissions. Existing studies benchmark these emissions but lack a standardized basis for comparison across models. To address this, we introduce the concept of a functional unit (FU) and develop FUEL, the first FU-based framework for evaluating LLM serving's environmental impact. Through case studies on model size, quantization, and hardware, we uncover key trade-offs in sustainability. Our findings highlight the potential for reducing carbon emissions by optimizing model selection, deployment strategies, and hardware choices, paving the way for more sustainable AI infrastructure.