The European Union has published the full and final text for the EU AI Act in its Official Journal, as reported by TechCrunch. Since the new law will come into force 20 days after its publication, that means it will be enforceable starting on August 1. All its provisions will be fully applicable in two years' time, but some of them will be implemented much earlier than that. Six months from now, the bloc will start implementing bans on prohibited applications for AI, such as the use of social credit ranking systems, the collection and compilation of facial recognition information for databases, as well the use of real time emotion recognition systems in schools and workplaces. In nine months, the EU will start implementing codes of practice on AI developers.

Image-text interleaved data, consisting of multiple images and texts arranged in a natural document format, aligns with the presentation paradigm of internet data and closely resembles human reading habits. Recent studies have shown that such data aids multimodal in-context learning and maintains the capabilities of large language models during multimodal fine-tuning. However, the limited scale and diversity of current image-text interleaved data restrict the development of multimodal large language models. In this paper, we introduce OmniCorpus, a 10 billion-level image-text interleaved dataset. Using an efficient data engine, we filter and extract large-scale high-quality documents, which contain 8.6 billion images and 1,696 billion text tokens. Compared to counterparts (e.g., MMC4, OBELICS), our dataset 1) has 15 times larger scales while maintaining good data quality; 2) features more diverse sources, including both English and non-English websites as well as video-centric websites; 3) is more flexible, easily degradable from an image-text interleaved format to pure text corpus and image-text pairs. Through comprehensive analysis and experiments, we validate the quality, usability, and effectiveness of the proposed dataset. We hope this could provide a solid data foundation for future multimodal model research.

We present ACME: A Chatbot for asylum-seeking Migrants tool that goes beyond the checklists used for handling well-defined, in Europe. ACME relies on computational argumentation and simple procedures since there is not only a problem of evaluating aims to help migrants identify the highest level of protection they legal and factual data, but there is also an issue with understanding can apply for. This would contribute to a more sustainable migration which procedures are relevant. Indeed, there is not only one type of by reducing the load on territorial commissions, Courts, and humanitarian protection but several ones. Importantly, since applicants may be political organizations supporting asylum applicants. We describe the refugees and victims of abuse, discrimination, and persecution, context, system architectures, technologies, and the case study used the collection and processing of their personal data for immigration to run the demonstration.

Contemporary language models are increasingly multilingual, but Chinese LLM developers must navigate complex political and business considerations of language diversity. Language policy in China aims at influencing the public discourse and governing a multi-ethnic society, and has gradually transitioned from a pluralist to a more assimilationist approach since 1949. We explore the impact of these influences on current language technology. We evaluate six open-source multilingual LLMs pre-trained by Chinese companies on 18 languages, spanning a wide range of Chinese, Asian, and Anglo-European languages. Our experiments show Chinese LLMs performance on diverse languages is indistinguishable from international LLMs. Similarly, the models' technical reports also show lack of consideration for pretraining data language coverage except for English and Mandarin Chinese. Examining Chinese AI policy, model experiments, and technical reports, we find no sign of any consistent policy, either for or against, language diversity in China's LLM development. This leaves a puzzling fact that while China regulates both the languages people use daily as well as language model development, they do not seem to have any policy on the languages in language models.

The significant progress in the development of Large Language Models has contributed to blurring the distinction between human and AI-generated text. The increasing pervasiveness of AI-generated text and the difficulty in detecting it poses new challenges for our society. In this paper, we tackle the problem of detecting and attributing AI-generated text by proposing WhosAI, a triplet-network contrastive learning framework designed to predict whether a given input text has been generated by humans or AI and to unveil the authorship of the text. Unlike most existing approaches, our proposed framework is conceived to learn semantic similarity representations from multiple generators at once, thus equally handling both detection and attribution tasks. Furthermore, WhosAI is model-agnostic and scalable to the release of new AI text-generation models by incorporating their generated instances into the embedding space learned by our framework. Experimental results on the TuringBench benchmark of 200K news articles show that our proposed framework achieves outstanding results in both the Turing Test and Authorship Attribution tasks, outperforming all the methods listed in the TuringBench benchmark leaderboards.

Material selection plays a pivotal role in many industries, from manufacturing to construction. Material selection is usually carried out after several cycles of conceptual design, during which designers iteratively refine the design solution and the intended manufacturing approach. In design research, material selection is typically treated as an optimization problem with a single correct answer. Moreover, it is also often restricted to specific types of objects or design functions, which can make the selection process computationally expensive and time-consuming. In this paper, we introduce MSEval, a novel dataset which is comprised of expert material evaluations across a variety of design briefs and criteria. This data is designed to serve as a benchmark to facilitate the evaluation and modification of machine learning models in the context of material selection for conceptual design.

The widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs) has raised concerns about their safety and reliability, particularly regarding their vulnerability to adversarial attacks. In this paper, we propose a novel perspective that attributes this vulnerability to reward misspecification during the alignment process. We introduce a metric ReGap to quantify the extent of reward misspecification and demonstrate its effectiveness and robustness in detecting harmful backdoor prompts. Building upon these insights, we present ReMiss, a system for automated red teaming that generates adversarial prompts against various target aligned LLMs. ReMiss achieves state-of-the-art attack success rates on the AdvBench benchmark while preserving the human readability of the generated prompts. Detailed analysis highlights the unique advantages brought by the proposed reward misspecification objective compared to previous methods.

As AI systems appear to exhibit ever-increasing capability and generality, assessing their true potential and safety becomes paramount. This paper contends that the prevalent evaluation methods for these systems are fundamentally inadequate, heightening the risks and potential hazards associated with AI. I argue that a reformation is required in the way we evaluate AI systems and that we should look towards cognitive sciences for inspiration in our approaches, which have a longstanding tradition of assessing general intelligence across diverse species. We will identify some of the difficulties that need to be overcome when applying cognitively-inspired approaches to general-purpose AI systems and also analyse the emerging area of "Evals". The paper concludes by identifying promising research pathways that could refine AI evaluation, advancing it towards a rigorous scientific domain that contributes to the development of safe AI systems.

Multi-agent AI systems can be used for simulating collective decision-making in scientific and practical applications. They can also be used to introduce a diverse group discussion step in chatbot pipelines, enhancing the cultural sensitivity of the chatbot's responses. These applications, however, are predicated on the ability of AI agents to reliably adopt assigned personas and mimic human interactions. To evaluate the ability of LLM agents to satisfy these requirements, we examine AI agent ensembles engaged in cultural collaboration and debate by analyzing their private responses and chat transcripts. Our findings suggest that multi-agent discussions can encourage collective decisions that reflect diverse perspectives, yet this benefit is tempered by the agents' susceptibility to conformity due to perceived peer pressure and challenges in maintaining consistent personas and opinions. Instructions that encourage debate in support of one's opinions rather than collaboration increase the rate of inconstancy. Without addressing the factors we identify, the full potential of multi-agent frameworks for producing more culturally diverse AI outputs or more realistic simulations of group decision-making will remain untapped.

This paper investigates neuron dropout as a post-processing bias mitigation for deep neural networks (DNNs). Neural-driven software solutions are increasingly applied in socially critical domains with significant fairness implications. While neural networks are exceptionally good at finding statistical patterns from data, they may encode and amplify existing biases from the historical data. Existing bias mitigation algorithms often require modifying the input dataset or the learning algorithms. We posit that the prevalent dropout methods that prevent over-fitting during training by randomly dropping neurons may be an effective and less intrusive approach to improve the fairness of pre-trained DNNs. However, finding the ideal set of neurons to drop is a combinatorial problem. We propose NeuFair, a family of post-processing randomized algorithms that mitigate unfairness in pre-trained DNNs via dropouts during inference after training. Our randomized search is guided by an objective to minimize discrimination while maintaining the model's utility. We show that our design of randomized algorithms is effective and efficient in improving fairness (up to 69%) with minimal or no model performance degradation. We provide intuitive explanations of these phenomena and carefully examine the influence of various hyperparameters of search algorithms on the results. Finally, we empirically and conceptually compare NeuFair to different state-of-the-art bias mitigators.