We propose protected pipelines or props for short, a new approach for authenticated, privacy-preserving access to deep-web data for machine learning (ML). By permitting secure use of vast sources of deep-web data, props address the systemic bottleneck of limited high-quality training data in ML development. Props also enable privacy-preserving and trustworthy forms of inference, allowing for safe use of sensitive data in ML applications. Props are practically realizable today by leveraging privacy-preserving oracle systems initially developed for blockchain applications.

This research tests the role of Large Language Models (LLMs) as formal second opinion tools in professional decision-making, particularly focusing on complex medical cases where even experienced physicians seek peer consultation. The work analyzed 183 challenging medical cases from Medscape over a 20-month period, testing multiple LLMs' performance against crowd-sourced physician responses. A key finding was the high overall score possible in the latest foundational models (>80% accuracy compared to consensus opinion), which exceeds most human metrics reported on the same clinical cases (450 pages of patient profiles, test results). The study rates the LLMs' performance disparity between straightforward cases (>81% accuracy) and complex scenarios (43% accuracy), particularly in these cases generating substantial debate among human physicians. The research demonstrates that LLMs may be valuable as generators of comprehensive differential diagnoses rather than as primary diagnostic tools, potentially helping to counter cognitive biases in clinical decision-making, reduce cognitive loads, and thus remove some sources of medical error. The inclusion of a second comparative legal dataset (Supreme Court cases, N=21) provides added empirical context to the AI use to foster second opinions, though these legal challenges proved considerably easier for LLMs to analyze. In addition to the original contributions of empirical evidence for LLM accuracy, the research aggregated a novel benchmark for others to score highly contested question and answer reliability between both LLMs and disagreeing human practitioners. These results suggest that the optimal deployment of LLMs in professional settings may differ substantially from current approaches that emphasize automation of routine tasks.

Last year, Kaylin Hayman walked into a Pittsburgh court to testify against a man she'd never met who had used her face to make pornographic pictures with artificial intelligence technology. Kaylin, 16, is a child actress who starred in the Disney show Just Roll With It from 2019 to 2021. The perpetrator, a 57-year-old man named James Smelko, had targeted her because of her public profile. She is one of about 40 of his victims, all of them child actors. In one of the images of Kaylin submitted into evidence at the trial, Smelko used her face from a photo posted on Instagram when she was 12, working on set, and superimposed it onto the naked body of someone else.

Inaccuracies in polygraph tests often lead to wrongful convictions, false information, and bias, all of which have significant consequences for both legal and political systems. Recently, analyzing facial micro-expressions has emerged as a method for detecting deception; however, current models have not reached high accuracy and generalizability. The purpose of this study is to aid in remedying these problems. The unique multimodal transformer architecture used in this study improves upon previous approaches by using auditory inputs, visual facial micro-expressions, and manually transcribed gesture annotations, moving closer to a reliable non-invasive lie detection model. Visual and auditory features were extracted using the Vision Transformer and OpenSmile models respectively, which were then concatenated with the transcriptions of participants micro-expressions and gestures. Various models were trained for the classification of lies and truths using these processed and concatenated features. The CNN Conv1D multimodal model achieved an average accuracy of 95.4%. However, further research is still required to create higher-quality datasets and even more generalized models for more diverse applications.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) become more prevalent, concerns about their safety, ethics, and potential biases have risen. Systematically evaluating LLMs' risk decision-making tendencies and attitudes, particularly in the ethical domain, has become crucial. This study innovatively applies the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) scale from cognitive science to LLMs and proposes a novel Ethical Decision-Making Risk Attitude Scale (EDRAS) to assess LLMs' ethical risk attitudes in depth. We further propose a novel approach integrating risk scales and role-playing to quantitatively evaluate systematic biases in LLMs. Through systematic evaluation and analysis of multiple mainstream LLMs, we assessed the "risk personalities" of LLMs across multiple domains, with a particular focus on the ethical domain, and revealed and quantified LLMs' systematic biases towards different groups. This research helps understand LLMs' risk decision-making and ensure their safe and reliable application. Our approach provides a tool for identifying and mitigating biases, contributing to fairer and more trustworthy AI systems. The code and data are available.

Regulatory frameworks for the use of AI are emerging. However, they trail behind the fast-evolving malicious AI technologies that can quickly cause lasting societal damage. In response, we introduce a pioneering Assistive AI framework designed to enhance human decision-making capabilities. This framework aims to establish a trust network across various fields, especially within legal contexts, serving as a proactive complement to ongoing regulatory efforts. Central to our framework are the principles of privacy, accountability, and credibility. In our methodology, the foundation of reliability of information and information sources is built upon the ability to uphold accountability, enhance security, and protect privacy. This approach supports, filters, and potentially guides communication, thereby empowering individuals and communities to make well-informed decisions based on cutting-edge advancements in AI. Our framework uses the concept of Boards as proxies to collectively ensure that AI-assisted decisions are reliable, accountable, and in alignment with societal values and legal standards. Through a detailed exploration of our framework, including its main components, operations, and sample use cases, the paper shows how AI can assist in the complex process of decision-making while maintaining human oversight. The proposed framework not only extends regulatory landscapes but also highlights the synergy between AI technology and human judgement, underscoring the potential of AI to serve as a vital instrument in discerning reality from fiction and thus enhancing the decision-making process. Furthermore, we provide domain-specific use cases to highlight the applicability of our framework.

Users often interact with large language models through black-box inference APIs, both for closed- and open-weight models (e.g., Llama models are popularly accessed via Amazon Bedrock and Azure AI Studio). In order to cut costs or add functionality, API providers may quantize, watermark, or finetune the underlying model, changing the output distribution -- often without notifying users. We formalize detecting such distortions as Model Equality Testing, a two-sample testing problem, where the user collects samples from the API and a reference distribution and conducts a statistical test to see if the two distributions are the same. We find that tests based on the Maximum Mean Discrepancy between distributions are powerful for this task: a test built on a simple string kernel achieves a median of 77.4% power against a range of distortions, using an average of just 10 samples per prompt. We then apply this test to commercial inference APIs for four Llama models, finding that 11 out of 31 endpoints serve different distributions than reference weights released by Meta.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has been an effective approach to mitigate hallucinations in large language models (LLMs) by incorporating up-to-date and domain-specific knowledge. Recently, there has been a trend of storing up-to-date or copyrighted data in RAG knowledge databases instead of using it for LLM training. This practice has raised concerns about Membership Inference Attacks (MIAs), which aim to detect if a specific target document is stored in the RAG system's knowledge database so as to protect the rights of data producers. While research has focused on enhancing the trustworthiness of RAG systems, existing MIAs for RAG systems remain largely insufficient. Previous work either relies solely on the RAG system's judgment or is easily influenced by other documents or the LLM's internal knowledge, which is unreliable and lacks explainability. To address these limitations, we propose a Mask-Based Membership Inference Attacks (MBA) framework. Our framework first employs a masking algorithm that effectively masks a certain number of words in the target document. The masked text is then used to prompt the RAG system, and the RAG system is required to predict the mask values. If the target document appears in the knowledge database, the masked text will retrieve the complete target document as context, allowing for accurate mask prediction. Finally, we adopt a simple yet effective threshold-based method to infer the membership of target document by analyzing the accuracy of mask prediction. Our mask-based approach is more document-specific, making the RAG system's generation less susceptible to distractions from other documents or the LLM's internal knowledge. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach compared to existing baseline models.

Clear legal language forms the backbone of a contract for numerous reasons. Disputes often arise between contract parties where ambiguous language has been used and parties often disagree on the meaning or effect of the words. Unambiguous language can also be important where there is an imbalance of bargaining strength between the parties, for instance where a business is contracting with a consumer, where the law actually requires plain language to be used. Thus, plain language minimises misinterpretation and prevents future litigation. Contracts become ambiguous when the language used is vague, imprecise, or open to multiple interpretations and this is due to the vast number of synonyms in the English Language which creates differences in interpretation between the meaning of the language. Ambiguity has always formed a prevalent issue in case-law, with a large percentage of cases based on ambiguous language. Thus, from an outside perspective the legal sector should look forward to ways of reducing this.

Limited public understanding of legal processes and inconsistent verdicts in the Indonesian court system led to widespread dissatisfaction and increased stress on judges. This study addresses these issues by developing a deep learning-based predictive system for court sentence lengths. Our hybrid model, combining CNN and BiLSTM with attention mechanism, achieved an R-squared score of 0.5893, effectively capturing both local patterns and long-term dependencies in legal texts. While document summarization proved ineffective, using only the top 30% most frequent tokens increased prediction performance, suggesting that focusing on core legal terminology balances information retention and computational efficiency. We also implemented a modified text normalization process, addressing common errors like misspellings and incorrectly merged words, which significantly improved the model's performance. These findings have important implications for automating legal document processing, aiding both professionals and the public in understanding court judgments. By leveraging advanced NLP techniques, this research contributes to enhancing transparency and accessibility in the Indonesian legal system, paving the way for more consistent and comprehensible legal decisions.