Purpose: Hard-to-interpret Black-box Machine Learning (ML) were often used for early Alzheimer's Disease (AD) detection. Methods: To interpret eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost), Random Forest (RF), and Support Vector Machine (SVM) black-box models a workflow based on Shapley values was developed. All models were trained on the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) dataset and evaluated for an independent ADNI test set, as well as the external Australian Imaging and Lifestyle flagship study of Ageing (AIBL), and Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS) datasets. Shapley values were compared to intuitively interpretable Decision Trees (DTs), and Logistic Regression (LR), as well as natural and permutation feature importances. To avoid the reduction of the explanation validity caused by correlated features, forward selection and aspect consolidation were implemented. Results: Some black-box models outperformed DTs and LR. The forward-selected features correspond to brain areas previously associated with AD. Shapley values identified biologically plausible associations with moderate to strong correlations with feature importances. The most important RF features to predict AD conversion were the volume of the amygdalae, and a cognitive test score. Good cognitive test performances and large brain volumes decreased the AD risk. The models trained using cognitive test scores significantly outperformed brain volumetric models ($p<0.05$). Cognitive Normal (CN) vs. AD models were successfully transferred to external datasets. Conclusion: In comparison to previous work, improved performances for ADNI and AIBL were achieved for CN vs. Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) classification using brain volumes. The Shapley values and the feature importances showed moderate to strong correlations.

Natural laws are often described through differential equations yet finding a differential equation that describes the governing law underlying observed data is a challenging and still mostly manual task. In this paper we make a step towards the automation of this process: we propose a transformer-based sequence-to-sequence model that recovers scalar autonomous ordinary differential equations (ODEs) in symbolic form from time-series data of a single observed solution of the ODE. Our method is efficiently scalable: after one-time pretraining on a large set of ODEs, we can infer the governing laws of a new observed solution in a few forward passes of the model. Then we show that our model performs better or on par with existing methods in various test cases in terms of accurate symbolic recovery of the ODE, especially for more complex expressions.

In this paper, we take a first step towards answering the question of how to design fair machine learning algorithms that are robust to adversarial attacks. Using a minimax framework, we aim to design an adversarially robust fair regression model that achieves optimal performance in the presence of an attacker who is able to add a carefully designed adversarial data point to the dataset or perform a rank-one attack on the dataset. By solving the proposed nonsmooth nonconvex-nonconcave minimax problem, the optimal adversary as well as the robust fairness-aware regression model are obtained. For both synthetic data and real-world datasets, numerical results illustrate that the proposed adversarially robust fair models have better performance on poisoned datasets than other fair machine learning models in both prediction accuracy and group-based fairness measure.

We consider the problem of robustly testing the norm of a high-dimensional sparse signal vector under two different observation models. In the first model, we are given $n$ i.i.d. samples from the distribution $\mathcal{N}\left(\theta,I_d\right)$ (with unknown $\theta$), of which a small fraction has been arbitrarily corrupted. Under the promise that $\|\theta\|_0\le s$, we want to correctly distinguish whether $\|\theta\|_2=0$ or $\|\theta\|_2>\gamma$, for some input parameter $\gamma>0$. We show that any algorithm for this task requires $n=\Omega\left(s\log\frac{ed}{s}\right)$ samples, which is tight up to logarithmic factors. We also extend our results to other common notions of sparsity, namely, $\|\theta\|_q\le s$ for any $0 < q < 2$. In the second observation model that we consider, the data is generated according to a sparse linear regression model, where the covariates are i.i.d. Gaussian and the regression coefficient (signal) is known to be $s$-sparse. Here too we assume that an $\epsilon$-fraction of the data is arbitrarily corrupted. We show that any algorithm that reliably tests the norm of the regression coefficient requires at least $n=\Omega\left(\min(s\log d,{1}/{\gamma^4})\right)$ samples. Our results show that the complexity of testing in these two settings significantly increases under robustness constraints. This is in line with the recent observations made in robust mean testing and robust covariance testing.

Machine learning is the study of computer algorithms that can automatically improve based on data and experience. Machine learning algorithms build a model from sample data, called training data, to make predictions or judgments without being explicitly programmed to do so. A variety of wellknown machine learning algorithms have been developed for use in the field of computer science to analyze data. This paper introduced a new machine learning algorithm called impact learning. Impact learning is a supervised learning algorithm that can be consolidated in both classification and regression problems. It can furthermore manifest its superiority in analyzing competitive data. This algorithm is remarkable for learning from the competitive situation and the competition comes from the effects of autonomous features. It is prepared by the impacts of the highlights from the intrinsic rate of natural increase (RNI). We, moreover, manifest the prevalence of the impact learning over the conventional machine learning algorithm.

Federated learning provides an effective paradigm to jointly optimize a model benefited from rich distributed data while protecting data privacy. Nonetheless, the heterogeneity nature of distributed data makes it challenging to define and ensure fairness among local agents. For instance, it is intuitively "unfair" for agents with data of high quality to sacrifice their performance due to other agents with low quality data. Currently popular egalitarian and weighted equity-based fairness measures suffer from the aforementioned pitfall. In this work, we aim to formally represent this problem and address these fairness issues using concepts from co-operative game theory and social choice theory. We model the task of learning a shared predictor in the federated setting as a fair public decision making problem, and then define the notion of core-stable fairness: Given $N$ agents, there is no subset of agents $S$ that can benefit significantly by forming a coalition among themselves based on their utilities $U_N$ and $U_S$ (i.e., $\frac{|S|}{N} U_S \geq U_N$). Core-stable predictors are robust to low quality local data from some agents, and additionally they satisfy Proportionality and Pareto-optimality, two well sought-after fairness and efficiency notions within social choice. We then propose an efficient federated learning protocol CoreFed to optimize a core stable predictor. CoreFed determines a core-stable predictor when the loss functions of the agents are convex. CoreFed also determines approximate core-stable predictors when the loss functions are not convex, like smooth neural networks. We further show the existence of core-stable predictors in more general settings using Kakutani's fixed point theorem. Finally, we empirically validate our analysis on two real-world datasets, and we show that CoreFed achieves higher core-stability fairness than FedAvg while having similar accuracy.

This article was published as a part of the Data Science Blogathon. Hyperparameter tuning or optimization is important in any machine learning model training activity. The hyperparameters of a model cannot be determined from the given datasets through the learning process. However, they are very crucial to control the learning process itself. These hyperparameters originate from the mathematical formulation of machine learning models. For example, the weights learned while training a linear regression model are parameters, but the learning rate in gradient descent is a hyperparameter.

Clinical prediction models estimate an individual's risk of a particular health outcome, conditional on their values of multiple predictors. A developed model is a consequence of the development dataset and the chosen model building strategy, including the sample size, number of predictors and analysis method (e.g., regression or machine learning). Here, we raise the concern that many models are developed using small datasets that lead to instability in the model and its predictions (estimated risks). We define four levels of model stability in estimated risks moving from the overall mean to the individual level. Then, through simulation and case studies of statistical and machine learning approaches, we show instability in a model's estimated risks is often considerable, and ultimately manifests itself as miscalibration of predictions in new data. Therefore, we recommend researchers should always examine instability at the model development stage and propose instability plots and measures to do so. This entails repeating the model building steps (those used in the development of the original prediction model) in each of multiple (e.g., 1000) bootstrap samples, to produce multiple bootstrap models, and then deriving (i) a prediction instability plot of bootstrap model predictions (y-axis) versus original model predictions (x-axis), (ii) a calibration instability plot showing calibration curves for the bootstrap models in the original sample; and (iii) the instability index, which is the mean absolute difference between individuals' original and bootstrap model predictions. A case study is used to illustrate how these instability assessments help reassure (or not) whether model predictions are likely to be reliable (or not), whilst also informing a model's critical appraisal (risk of bias rating), fairness assessment and further validation requirements.

Fetal growth restriction (FGR) is a prevalent pregnancy condition characterised by failure of the fetus to reach its genetically predetermined growth potential. We explore the application of model fitting techniques, linear regression machine learning models, deep learning regression, and Haralick textured features from multi-contrast MRI for multi-fetal organ analysis of FGR. We employed T2 relaxometry and diffusion-weighted MRI datasets (using a combined T2-diffusion scan) for 12 normally grown and 12 FGR gestational age (GA) matched pregnancies. We applied the Intravoxel Incoherent Motion Model and novel multi-compartment models for MRI fetal analysis, which exhibit potential to provide a multi-organ FGR assessment, overcoming the limitations of empirical indicators - such as abnormal artery Doppler findings - to evaluate placental dysfunction. The placenta and fetal liver presented key differentiators between FGR and normal controls (decreased perfusion, abnormal fetal blood motion and reduced fetal blood oxygenation. This may be associated with the preferential shunting of the fetal blood towards the fetal brain. These features were further explored to determine their role in assessing FGR severity, by employing simple machine learning models to predict FGR diagnosis (100\% accuracy in test data, n=5), GA at delivery, time from MRI scan to delivery, and baby weight. Moreover, we explored the use of deep learning to regress the latter three variables. Image texture analysis of the fetal organs demonstrated prominent textural variations in the placental perfusion fractions maps between the groups (p$<$0.0009), and spatial differences in the incoherent fetal capillary blood motion in the liver (p$<$0.009). This research serves as a proof-of-concept, investigating the effect of FGR on fetal organs.

Clinical notes are becoming an increasingly important data source for machine learning (ML) applications in healthcare. Prior research has shown that deploying ML models can perpetuate existing biases against racial minorities, as bias can be implicitly embedded in data. In this study, we investigate the level of implicit race information available to ML models and human experts and the implications of model-detectable differences in clinical notes. Our work makes three key contributions. First, we find that models can identify patient self-reported race from clinical notes even when the notes are stripped of explicit indicators of race. Second, we determine that human experts are not able to accurately predict patient race from the same redacted clinical notes. Finally, we demonstrate the potential harm of this implicit information in a simulation study, and show that models trained on these race-redacted clinical notes can still perpetuate existing biases in clinical treatment decisions.