South Africa and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) present a complex linguistic landscape with languages such as Zulu, Sepedi, Afrikaans, French, English, and Tshiluba (Ciluba), which creates unique challenges for AI-driven translation and sentiment analysis systems due to a lack of accurately labeled data. This study seeks to address these challenges by developing a multilingual lexicon designed for French and Tshiluba, now expanded to include translations in English, Afrikaans, Sepedi, and Zulu. The lexicon enhances cultural relevance in sentiment classification by integrating language-specific sentiment scores. A comprehensive testing corpus is created to support translation and sentiment analysis tasks, with machine learning models such as Random Forest, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Decision Trees, and Gaussian Naive Bayes (GNB) trained to predict sentiment across low resource languages (LRLs). Among them, the Random Forest model performed particularly well, capturing sentiment polarity and handling language-specific nuances effectively. Furthermore, Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), a Large Language Model (LLM), is applied to predict context-based sentiment with high accuracy, achieving 99% accuracy and 98% precision, outperforming other models. The BERT predictions were clarified using Explainable AI (XAI), improving transparency and fostering confidence in sentiment classification. Overall, findings demonstrate that the proposed lexicon and machine learning models significantly enhance translation and sentiment analysis for LRLs in South Africa and the DRC, laying a foundation for future AI models that support underrepresented languages, with applications across education, governance, and business in multilingual contexts.

Deduplication is a major focus for assembling and curating training datasets for large language models (LLM) -- detecting and eliminating additional instances of the same content -- in large collections of technical documents. Unrestrained, duplicates in the training dataset increase training costs and lead to undesirable properties such as memorization in trained models or cheating on evaluation. Contemporary approaches to document-level deduplication are often extremely expensive in both runtime and memory. We propose LSHBloom, an extension to MinhashLSH, which replaces the expensive LSHIndex with lightweight Bloom filters. LSHBloom demonstrates the same deduplication performance as MinhashLSH with only a marginal increase in false positives (as low as 1e-5 in our experiments); demonstrates competitive runtime (270\% faster than MinhashLSH on peS2o); and, crucially, uses just 0.6\% of the disk space required by MinhashLSH to deduplicate peS2o. We demonstrate that this space advantage scales with increased dataset size -- at the extreme scale of several billion documents, LSHBloom promises a 250\% speedup and a 54$\times$ space advantage over traditional MinHashLSH scaling deduplication of text datasets to many billions of documents.

The growing power of data science can play a crucial role in addressing social discrimination, necessitating nuanced understanding and effective mitigation strategies of potential biases. Data Science Looks At Discrimination (dsld) is an R and Python package designed to provide users with a comprehensive toolkit of statistical and graphical methods for assessing possible discrimination related to protected groups, such as race, gender, and age. Our software offers techniques for discrimination analysis by identifying and mitigating confounding variables, along with methods for reducing bias in predictive models. In educational settings, dsld offers instructors powerful tools to teach important statistical principles through motivating real world examples of discrimination analysis. The inclusion of an 80-page Quarto book further supports users, from statistics educators to legal professionals, in effectively applying these analytical tools to real world scenarios.

Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is a major public health concern due to its high risk of progressing to dementia. This study investigates the potential of detecting MCI with spontaneous voice assistant (VA) commands from 35 older adults in a controlled setting. Specifically, a command-generation task is designed with pre-defined intents for participants to freely generate commands that are more associated with cognitive ability than read commands. We develop MCI classification and regression models with audio, textual, intent, and multimodal fusion features. We find the command-generation task outperforms the command-reading task with an average classification accuracy of 82%, achieved by leveraging multimodal fusion features. In addition, generated commands correlate more strongly with memory and attention subdomains than read commands. Our results confirm the effectiveness of the command-generation task and imply the promise of using longitudinal in-home commands for MCI detection.

Fine-tuned vision-language models (VLMs) often capture spurious correlations between image features and textual attributes, resulting in degraded zero-shot performance at test time. Existing approaches for addressing spurious correlations (i) primarily operate at the global image-level rather than intervening directly on fine-grained image features and (ii) are predominantly designed for unimodal settings. In this work, we present RaVL, which takes a fine-grained perspective on VLM robustness by discovering and mitigating spurious correlations using local image features rather than operating at the global image level. Given a fine-tuned VLM, RaVL first discovers spurious correlations by leveraging a region-level clustering approach to identify precise image features contributing to zero-shot classification errors. Then, RaVL mitigates the identified spurious correlation with a novel region-aware loss function that enables the VLM to focus on relevant regions and ignore spurious relationships during fine-tuning. We evaluate RaVL on 654 VLMs with various model architectures, data domains, and learned spurious correlations. Our results show that RaVL accurately discovers (191% improvement over the closest baseline) and mitigates (8.2% improvement on worst-group image classification accuracy) spurious correlations. Qualitative evaluations on general-domain and medical-domain VLMs confirm our findings.

Hampering the interpretation of benchmark scores, evaluation data contamination has become a growing concern in the evaluation of LLMs, and an active area of research studies its effects. While evaluation data contamination is easily understood intuitively, it is surprisingly difficult to define precisely which samples should be considered contaminated and, consequently, how it impacts benchmark scores. We propose that these questions should be addressed together and that contamination metrics can be assessed based on whether models benefit from the examples they mark contaminated. We propose a novel analysis method called ConTAM, and show with a large scale survey of existing and novel n-gram based contamination metrics across 13 benchmarks and 7 models from 2 different families that ConTAM can be used to better understand evaluation data contamination and its effects. We find that contamination may have a much larger effect than reported in recent LLM releases and benefits models differently at different scales. We also find that considering only the longest contaminated substring provides a better signal than considering a union of all contaminated substrings, and that doing model and benchmark specific threshold analysis greatly increases the specificity of the results. Lastly, we investigate the impact of hyperparameter choices, finding that, among other things, both using larger values of n and disregarding matches that are infrequent in the pre-training data lead to many false negatives. With ConTAM, we provide a method to empirically ground evaluation data contamination metrics in downstream effects. With our exploration, we shed light on how evaluation data contamination can impact LLMs and provide insight into the considerations important when doing contamination analysis. We end our paper by discussing these in more detail and providing concrete suggestions for future work.

Smart metering networks are increasingly susceptible to cyber threats, where false data injection (FDI) appears as a critical attack. Data-driven-based machine learning (ML) methods have shown immense benefits in detecting FDI attacks via data learning and prediction abilities. Literature works have mostly focused on centralized learning and deploying FDI attack detection models at the control center, which requires data collection from local utilities like meters and transformers. However, this data sharing may raise privacy concerns due to the potential disclosure of household information like energy usage patterns. This paper proposes a new privacy-preserved FDI attack detection by developing an efficient federated learning (FL) framework in the smart meter network with edge computing. Distributed edge servers located at the network edge run an ML-based FDI attack detection model and share the trained model with the grid operator, aiming to build a strong FDI attack detection model without data sharing. Simulation results demonstrate the efficiency of our proposed FL method over the conventional method without collaboration.

Benchmarking can include comparing an ICU's actual performance with predicted performance. The increased interoperability of medical devices, electronic health records (EHRs) and information systems has improved the acquisition and presentation of data to healthcare professionals. This data has enabled the training of predictive models. However, thi s plethora of data sources has also introduced new risks that societal bias will lead to machine learning systems with fairness issues for patient groups. In addition, when variations in data documentation are non-random, significant bias can be introduced, improving, or worsening measured performance for an institution relative to peers. This work focuses on ICU mortality benchmarking. In particular, we analyze the fairness of a model based on Generalised Additiv e Models (GAM) [ 3 ] that predicts mortality in the ICU. This model is used to compare actual versus predicted outcom es to assess ICU performance.

We examine diverging preferences in human-labeled preference datasets. We develop a taxonomy of disagreement sources spanning 10 categories across four high-level classes--task underspecification, response style, refusals, and annotation errors. We find that the majority of disagreements are in opposition with standard reward modeling approaches, which are designed with the assumption that annotator disagreement is noise. We then explore how these findings impact two areas of LLM development: reward modeling and evaluation. In our experiments, we demonstrate how standard reward modeling methods, like the Bradley-Terry model, fail to differentiate whether a given preference judgment is the result of unanimous agreement among annotators or the majority opinion among diverging user preferences. We also find that these tendencies are also echoed by popular LLM-as-Judge evaluation methods, which consistently identify a winning response in cases of diverging preferences. These findings highlight remaining challenges in LLM evaluations, which are greatly influenced by divisive features like response style, and in developing pluralistically aligned LLMs. To address these issues, we develop methods for identifying diverging preferences to mitigate their influence on evaluation and training. As large language models (LLMs) continue to rise in prominence and to serve millions of people on a daily basis, there is an increasing need to ensure that systems are pluralistically aligned (Sorensen et al., 2024). Learning from human preferences has emerged as the standard method for adapting LLMs to facilitate user-assistant interactions with much success. Despite these advances, however, the field continues to struggle with the challenge of handing diverging preferences, where users disagree on the ideal response to a prompt. Prior works on developing pluralistically aligned LLMs have focused on the development of synthetic preference datasets, where disagreements are simulated based on author-defined features and frequencies (Poddar et al., 2024; Chen et al., 2024). In this work, we take a step back to ask the foundational question when and why do human annotators disagree in their preferences? To make this research possible, we introduce MultiPref-Disagreements and HelpSteer2-Disagreements.

The propensity of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate hallucinations and non-factual content undermines their reliability in high-stakes domains, where rigorous control over Type I errors (the conditional probability of incorrectly classifying hallucinations as truthful content) is essential. Despite its importance, formal verification of LLM factuality with such guarantees remains largely unexplored. In this paper, we introduce FactTest, a novel framework that statistically assesses whether a LLM can confidently provide correct answers to given questions with high-probability correctness guarantees. We formulate factuality testing as hypothesis testing problem to enforce an upper bound of Type I errors at user-specified significance levels. Notably, we prove that our framework also ensures strong Type II error control under mild conditions and can be extended to maintain its effectiveness when covariate shifts exist. Our approach is distribution-free and works for any number of human-annotated samples. It is model-agnostic and applies to any black-box or white-box LM. Extensive experiments on question-answering (QA) and multiple-choice benchmarks demonstrate that FactTest effectively detects hallucinations and improves the model's ability to abstain from answering unknown questions, leading to an over 40% accuracy improvement.