The development of neural sequence models, such as Transformers [Vaswani et al., 2017], along with the improvements in large-scale self-supervised learning, has opened the door to universal language understanding and generation. This achievement is largely motivated by pre-training: we separate common components from many neural network-based systems, and then train them on huge amounts of unlabeled data using self-supervision. These pre-trained models serve as foundation models that can be easily adapted to different tasks via fine-tuning or prompting. As a result, the paradigm of NLP has been enormously changed. In many cases, large-scale supervised learning for specific tasks is no longer required, and instead, we only need to adapt pre-trained foundation models.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) and generative AI become increasingly widespread, concerns about content safety have grown in parallel. Currently, there is a clear lack of high-quality, human-annotated datasets that address the full spectrum of LLM-related safety risks and are usable for commercial applications. To bridge this gap, we propose a comprehensive and adaptable taxonomy for categorizing safety risks, structured into 12 top-level hazard categories with an extension to 9 fine-grained subcategories. This taxonomy is designed to meet the diverse requirements of downstream users, offering more granular and flexible tools for managing various risk types. Using a hybrid data generation pipeline that combines human annotations with a multi-LLM "jury" system to assess the safety of responses, we obtain Aegis 2.0, a carefully curated collection of 34,248 samples of human-LLM interactions, annotated according to our proposed taxonomy. To validate its effectiveness, we demonstrate that several lightweight models, trained using parameter-efficient techniques on Aegis 2.0, achieve performance competitive with leading safety models fully fine-tuned on much larger, non-commercial datasets. In addition, we introduce a novel training blend that combines safety with topic following data.This approach enhances the adaptability of guard models, enabling them to generalize to new risk categories defined during inference. We plan to open-source Aegis 2.0 data and models to the research community to aid in the safety guardrailing of LLMs.

This study examines the ethical reasoning of six prominent generative large language models: OpenAI GPT-4o, Meta LLaMA 3.1, Perplexity, Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Google Gemini, and Mistral 7B. The research explores how these models articulate and apply ethical logic, particularly in response to moral dilemmas such as the Trolley Problem, and Heinz Dilemma. Departing from traditional alignment studies, the study adopts an explainability-transparency framework, prompting models to explain their ethical reasoning. This approach is analyzed through three established ethical typologies: the consequentialist-deontological analytic, Moral Foundations Theory, and the Kohlberg Stages of Moral Development Model. Findings reveal that LLMs exhibit largely convergent ethical logic, marked by a rationalist, consequentialist emphasis, with decisions often prioritizing harm minimization and fairness. Despite similarities in pre-training and model architecture, a mixture of nuanced and significant differences in ethical reasoning emerge across models, reflecting variations in fine-tuning and post-training processes. The models consistently display erudition, caution, and self-awareness, presenting ethical reasoning akin to a graduate-level discourse in moral philosophy. In striking uniformity these systems all describe their ethical reasoning as more sophisticated than what is characteristic of typical human moral logic.

Fox News' senior national correspondent William La Jeunesse joins'America's Newsroom' to discuss Congress' history of killing pushes for cost-cutting. FIRST ON FOX: The Congressional Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Caucus is holding its second-ever meeting on Wednesday, where its leaders are expected to unveil a set of "principles" to guide the group in its mission to cut government waste. They outlined eight goals, some practical while others more symbolic, in a bid to ensure the caucus is in sync with the DOGE advisory panel set up by President-elect Donald Trump. "The federal government must serve the interests of taxpayers, and taxpayers are best served by a lean, efficient, transparent, and accountable bureaucracy," the first principle read, according to a draft memo obtained by Fox News Digital. The document also suggested both lofty and smaller-scale goals.

Much of the research focus on AI alignment seeks to align large language models and other foundation models to the context-less and generic values of helpfulness, harmlessness, and honesty. Frontier model providers also strive to align their models with these values. In this paper, we motivate why we need to move beyond such a limited conception and propose three dimensions for doing so. The first scope of alignment is competence: knowledge, skills, or behaviors the model must possess to be useful for its intended purpose. The second scope of alignment is transience: either semantic or episodic depending on the context of use. The third scope of alignment is audience: either mass, public, small-group, or dyadic. At the end of the paper, we use the proposed framework to position some technologies and workflows that go beyond prevailing notions of alignment.

Protecting Personally Identifiable Information (PII), such as names, is a critical requirement in learning technologies to safeguard student and teacher privacy and maintain trust. Accurate PII detection is an essential step toward anonymizing sensitive information while preserving the utility of educational data. Motivated by recent advancements in artificial intelligence, our study investigates the GPT-4o-mini model as a cost-effective and efficient solution for PII detection tasks. We explore both prompting and fine-tuning approaches and compare GPT-4o-mini's performance against established frameworks, including Microsoft Presidio and Azure AI Language. Our evaluation on two public datasets, CRAPII and TSCC, demonstrates that the fine-tuned GPT-4o-mini model achieves superior performance, with a recall of 0.9589 on CRAPII. Additionally, fine-tuned GPT-4o-mini significantly improves precision scores (a threefold increase) while reducing computational costs to nearly one-tenth of those associated with Azure AI Language. Furthermore, our bias analysis reveals that the fine-tuned GPT-4o-mini model consistently delivers accurate results across diverse cultural backgrounds and genders. The generalizability analysis using the TSCC dataset further highlights its robustness, achieving a recall of 0.9895 with minimal additional training data from TSCC. These results emphasize the potential of fine-tuned GPT-4o-mini as an accurate and cost-effective tool for PII detection in educational data. It offers robust privacy protection while preserving the data's utility for research and pedagogical analysis. Our code is available on GitHub: https://github.com/AnonJD/PrivacyAI

Bias in Foundation Models (FMs) - trained on vast datasets spanning societal and historical knowledge - poses significant challenges for fairness and equity across fields such as healthcare, education, and finance. These biases, rooted in the overrepresentation of stereotypes and societal inequalities in training data, exacerbate real-world discrimination, reinforce harmful stereotypes, and erode trust in AI systems. To address this, we introduce Trident Probe Testing (TriProTesting), a systematic testing method that detects explicit and implicit biases using semantically designed probes. Here we show that FMs, including CLIP, ALIGN, BridgeTower, and OWLv2, demonstrate pervasive biases across single and mixed social attributes (gender, race, age, and occupation). Notably, we uncover mixed biases when social attributes are combined, such as gender x race, gender x age, and gender x occupation, revealing deeper layers of discrimination. We further propose Adaptive Logit Adjustment (AdaLogAdjustment), a post-processing technique that dynamically redistributes probability power to mitigate these biases effectively, achieving significant improvements in fairness without retraining models. These findings highlight the urgent need for ethical AI practices and interdisciplinary solutions to address biases not only at the model level but also in societal structures. Our work provides a scalable and interpretable solution that advances fairness in AI systems while offering practical insights for future research on fair AI technologies.

A person is directly racially discriminated against only if her race caused her worse treatment. This implies that race is an attribute sufficiently separable from other attributes to isolate its causal role. But race is embedded in a nexus of social factors that resist isolated treatment. If race is socially constructed, in what sense can it cause worse treatment? Some propose that the perception of race, rather than race itself, causes worse treatment. Others suggest that since causal models require modularity, i.e. the ability to isolate causal effects, attempts to causally model discrimination are misguided. This paper addresses the problem differently. We introduce a framework for reasoning about discrimination, in which race is a high-level abstraction of lower-level features. In this framework, race can be modeled as itself causing worse treatment. Modularity is ensured by allowing assumptions about social construction to be precisely and explicitly stated, via an alignment between race and its constituents. Such assumptions can then be subjected to normative and empirical challenges, which lead to different views of when discrimination occurs. By distinguishing constitutive and causal relations, the abstraction framework pinpoints disagreements in the current literature on modeling discrimination, while preserving a precise causal account of discrimination.

Many AI companies are training their large language models (LLMs) on data without the permission of the copyright owners. The permissibility of doing so varies by jurisdiction: in countries like the EU and Japan, this is allowed under certain restrictions, while in the United States, the legal landscape is more ambiguous. Regardless of the legal status, concerns from creative producers have led to several high-profile copyright lawsuits, and the threat of litigation is commonly cited as a reason for the recent trend towards minimizing the information shared about training datasets by both corporate and public interest actors. This trend in limiting data information causes harm by hindering transparency, accountability, and innovation in the broader ecosystem by denying researchers, auditors, and impacted individuals access to the information needed to understand AI models. While this could be mitigated by training language models on open access and public domain data, at the time of writing, there are no such models (trained at a meaningful scale) due to the substantial technical and sociological challenges in assembling the necessary corpus. These challenges include incomplete and unreliable metadata, the cost and complexity of digitizing physical records, and the diverse set of legal and technical skills required to ensure relevance and responsibility in a quickly changing landscape. Building towards a future where AI systems can be trained on openly licensed data that is responsibly curated and governed requires collaboration across legal, technical, and policy domains, along with investments in metadata standards, digitization, and fostering a culture of openness.

The field of AI is undergoing a fundamental transition from systems that can produce synthetic content upon request to autonomous agents that can plan and execute complex tasks with only limited human involvement. Companies that pioneered the development of generative AI tools are now building AI agents that can be instructed to independently navigate the internet, perform a wide range of online tasks, and serve as artificial personal assistants and virtual coworkers. The opportunities presented by this new technology are tremendous, as are the associated risks. Fortunately, there exist robust analytic frameworks for confronting many of these challenges, namely, the economic theory of principal-agent problems and the common law doctrine of agency relationships. Drawing on these frameworks, this Article makes three contributions. First, it uses agency law and theory to identify and characterize problems arising from AI agents, including issues of information asymmetry, discretionary authority, and loyalty. Second, it illustrates the limitations of conventional solutions to agency problems: incentive design, monitoring, and enforcement might not be effective for governing AI agents that make uninterpretable decisions and operate at unprecedented speed and scale. Third, the Article explores the implications of agency law and theory for designing and regulating AI agents, arguing that new technical and legal infrastructure is needed to support governance principles of inclusivity, visibility, and liability.