The case was first filed back in 2020. Then in August, Judge Amit Mehta ruled in favor of DOJ (and against Google), finding that Google ran its business as an illegal monopoly. Now, the DOJ has made its case for what it thinks Google should have to do in the wake of that verdict. Next, Google will propose its own set of remedies to the court. Finally, Judge Mehta will have to decide which, if any, of these remedies to enact. The government starts by calling for an end to "third party payments." This means Google would have to stop paying the likes of Apple and Mozilla to make Google search the default engine in those companies' browsers and devices.

Algorithmic agents are used in a variety of competitive decision settings, notably in making pricing decisions in contexts that range from online retail to residential home rentals. Business managers, algorithm designers, legal scholars, and regulators alike are all starting to consider the ramifications of "algorithmic collusion." We study the emergent behavior of multi-armed bandit machine learning algorithms used in situations where agents are competing, but they have no information about the strategic interaction they are engaged in. Using a general-form repeated Prisoner's Dilemma game, agents engage in online learning with no prior model of game structure and no knowledge of competitors' states or actions (e.g., no observation of competing prices). We show that these context-free bandits, with no knowledge of opponents' choices or outcomes, still will consistently learn collusive behavior - what we call "naive collusion." We primarily study this system through an analytical model and examine perturbations to the model through simulations. Our findings have several notable implications for regulators. First, calls to limit algorithms from conditioning on competitors' prices are insufficient to prevent algorithmic collusion. This is a direct result of collusion arising even in the naive setting. Second, symmetry in algorithms can increase collusion potential. This highlights a new, simple mechanism for "hub-and-spoke" algorithmic collusion. A central distributor need not imbue its algorithm with supra-competitive tendencies for apparent collusion to arise; it can simply arise by using certain (common) machine learning algorithms. Finally, we highlight that collusive outcomes depend starkly on the specific algorithm being used, and we highlight market and algorithmic conditions under which it will be unknown a priori whether collusion occurs.

This study explores the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in providing knowledge about cities and regions on a global scale. We employ two methods: directly querying the LLM for target variable values and extracting explicit and implicit features from the LLM correlated with the target variable. Our experiments reveal that LLMs embed a broad but varying degree of knowledge across global cities, with ML models trained on LLM-derived features consistently leading to improved predictive accuracy. Additionally, we observe that LLMs demonstrate a certain level of knowledge across global cities on all continents, but it is evident when they lack knowledge, as they tend to generate generic or random outputs for unfamiliar tasks. These findings suggest that LLMs can offer new opportunities for data-driven decision-making in the study of cities.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly impacted nearly every domain of human knowledge. However, the explainability of these models esp. to laypersons, which are crucial for instilling trust, have been examined through various skeptical lenses. In this paper, we introduce a novel notion of LLM explainability to laypersons, termed $\textit{ReQuesting}$, across three high-priority application domains -- law, health and finance, using multiple state-of-the-art LLMs. The proposed notion exhibits faithful generation of explainable layman-understandable algorithms on multiple tasks through high degree of reproducibility. Furthermore, we observe a notable alignment of the explainable algorithms with intrinsic reasoning of the LLMs.

We introduce the concept of leakage-robust Bayesian persuasion. Situated between public persuasion [KG11, CCG23, Xu20] and private persuasion [AB19], leakage-robust persuasion considers a setting where one or more signals privately sent by a sender to the receivers may be leaked. We study the design of leakage-robust persuasion schemes and quantify the price of robustness using two formalisms: - The first notion, $k$-worst-case persuasiveness, requires a scheme to remain persuasive as long as each receiver observes at most $k$ leaked signals. We quantify the Price of Worst-case Robustness (PoWR$_k$) -- i.e., the gap in sender's utility as compared to the optimal private scheme -- as $\Theta(\min\{2^k,n\})$ for supermodular sender utilities and $\Theta(k)$ for submodular or XOS utilities, where $n$ is the number of receivers. This result also establishes that in some instances, $\Theta(\log k)$ leakages are sufficient for the utility of the optimal leakage-robust persuasion to degenerate to that of public persuasion. - The second notion, expected downstream utility robustness, relaxes the persuasiveness and considers the impact on sender's utility when receivers best respond to their observations. By quantifying the Price of Downstream Robustness (PoDR) as the gap between the sender's expected utility over random leakage patterns as compared to private persuasion, we show that over several natural and structured distributions of leakage patterns, PoDR improves PoWR to $\Theta(k)$ or even $\Theta(1)$, where $k$ is the maximum number of leaked signals observable to each receiver across leakage patterns in the distribution. En route to these results, we show that subsampling and masking are general-purpose algorithmic paradigms for transforming private persuasion signaling schemes to leakage-robust ones, with minmax optimal loss in the sender's utility.

Users may inadvertently upload personally identifiable information (PII) to Machine Learning as a Service (MLaaS) providers. When users no longer want their PII on these services, regulations like GDPR and COPPA mandate a right to forget for these users. As such, these services seek efficient methods to remove the influence of specific data points. Thus the introduction of machine unlearning. Traditionally, unlearning is performed with the removal of entire data samples (sample unlearning) or whole features across the dataset (feature unlearning). However, these approaches are not equipped to handle the more granular and challenging task of unlearning specific objects within a sample. To address this gap, we propose a scene graph-based object unlearning framework. This framework utilizes scene graphs, rich in semantic representation, transparently translate unlearning requests into actionable steps. The result, is the preservation of the overall semantic integrity of the generated image, bar the unlearned object. Further, we manage high computational overheads with influence functions to approximate the unlearning process. For validation, we evaluate the unlearned object's fidelity in outputs under the tasks of image reconstruction and image synthesis. Our proposed framework demonstrates improved object unlearning outcomes, with the preservation of unrequested samples in contrast to sample and feature learning methods. This work addresses critical privacy issues by increasing the granularity of targeted machine unlearning through forgetting specific object-level details without sacrificing the utility of the whole data sample or dataset feature.

Reward models (RMs) are a crucial component in the alignment of large language models' (LLMs) outputs with human values. RMs approximate human preferences over possible LLM responses to the same prompt by predicting and comparing reward scores. However, as they are typically modified versions of LLMs with scalar output heads, RMs are large black boxes whose predictions are not explainable. More transparent RMs would enable improved trust in the alignment of LLMs. In this work, we propose to use contrastive explanations to explain any binary response comparison made by an RM. Specifically, we generate a diverse set of new comparisons similar to the original one to characterise the RM's local behaviour. The perturbed responses forming the new comparisons are generated to explicitly modify manually specified high-level evaluation attributes, on which analyses of RM behaviour are grounded. We then showcase the qualitative usefulness of our method for investigating global sensitivity of RMs to each evaluation attribute, and demonstrate how representative examples can be automatically extracted to explain and compare behaviours of different RMs. We see our method as a flexible framework for RM explanation, providing a basis for more interpretable and trustworthy LLM alignment. The training of safe and capable large language models (LLMs) typically involves a fine-tuning step to align their outputs with human preferences. Recent work by Xu et al. (2024) suggests that fine-tuning by reinforcement learning using a language reward model (RM), which represents these preferences by rating the quality of LLM responses to user prompts, remains the state-of-the-art alignment method. In such frameworks, the effectiveness of alignment heavily depends on the quality of the RM itself (Chaudhari et al., 2024). While a growing body of research aims at improving the performance of RMs (Bai et al., 2022; Chan et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2024a), evaluating and understanding RMs has received "relatively little study" (Lambert et al., 2024).

The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs) has enabled the ability to effectively analyze and generate code nearly instantaneously, resulting in their widespread adoption in software development. Following this advancement, researchers and companies have begun integrating LLMs across the hardware design and verification process. However, these highly potent LLMs can also induce new attack scenarios upon security vulnerabilities across the hardware development process. One such attack vector that has not been explored is intellectual property (IP) piracy. Given that this attack can manifest as rewriting hardware designs to evade piracy detection, it is essential to thoroughly evaluate LLM capabilities in performing this task and assess the mitigation abilities of current IP piracy detection tools. Therefore, in this work, we propose LLMPirate, the first LLM-based technique able to generate pirated variations of circuit designs that successfully evade detection across multiple state-of-the-art piracy detection tools. We devise three solutions to overcome challenges related to integration of LLMs for hardware circuit designs, scalability to large circuits, and effectiveness, resulting in an end-to-end automated, efficient, and practical formulation. We perform an extensive experimental evaluation of LLMPirate using eight LLMs of varying sizes and capabilities and assess their performance in pirating various circuit designs against four state-of-the-art, widely-used piracy detection tools. Our experiments demonstrate that LLMPirate is able to consistently evade detection on 100% of tested circuits across every detection tool. Additionally, we showcase the ramifications of LLMPirate using case studies on IBEX and MOR1KX processors and a GPS module, that we successfully pirate. We envision that our work motivates and fosters the development of better IP piracy detection tools.

The development of the sixth generation of communication networks (6G) has been gaining momentum over the past years, with a target of being introduced by 2030. Several initiatives worldwide are developing innovative solutions and setting the direction for the key features of these networks. Some common emerging themes are the tight integration of AI, the convergence of multiple access technologies and sustainable operation, aiming to meet stringent performance and societal requirements. To that end, we are introducing REASON - Realising Enabling Architectures and Solutions for Open Networks. The REASON project aims to address technical challenges in future network deployments, such as E2E service orchestration, sustainability, security and trust management, and policy management, utilising AI-native principles, considering multiple access technologies and cloud-native solutions. This paper presents REASON's architecture and the identified requirements for future networks. The architecture is meticulously designed for modularity, interoperability, scalability, simplified troubleshooting, flexibility, and enhanced security, taking into consideration current and future standardisation efforts, and the ease of implementation and training. It is structured into four horizontal layers: Physical Infrastructure, Network Service, Knowledge, and End-User Application, complemented by two vertical layers: Management and Orchestration, and E2E Security. This layered approach ensures a robust, adaptable framework to support the diverse and evolving requirements of 6G networks, fostering innovation and facilitating seamless integration of advanced technologies.

Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what's clicking on Foxnews.com. A Stanford University "misinformation expert" has been accused of using artificial intelligence (AI) to craft testimony later used by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison in a politically-charged case. Jeff Hancock, a professor of communications and founder of the vaunted school's Social Media Lab, provided an expert declaration in a case involving a satirical conservative YouTuber named Christopher Kohls. The court case is about Minnesota's recent ban on political deepfakes, which the plaintiffs argue is an attack on free speech.