Semi-supervised learning seeks to learn a machine learning model when only a small amount of the available data is labeled. The most widespread approach uses a graph prior, which encourages similar instances to have similar predictions. This has been very successful with models ranging from kernel machines to neural networks, but has remained inapplicable to decision trees, for which the optimization problem is much harder. We solve this based on a reformulation of the problem which requires iteratively solving two simpler problems: a supervised tree learning problem, which can be solved by the Tree Alternating Optimization algorithm; and a label smoothing problem, which can be solved through a sparse linear system. The algorithm is scalable and highly effective even with very few labeled instances, and makes it possible to learn accurate, interpretable models based on decision trees in such situations.

One of the most common mistakes made when performing data analysis is attributing causal meaning to regression coefficients. Formally, a causal effect can only be computed if it is identifiable from a combination of observational data and structural knowledge about the domain under investigation (Pearl, 2000, Ch. 5). Building on the literature of instrumental variables (IVs), a plethora of methods has been developed to identify causal effects in linear systems. Almost invariably, however, the most powerful such methods rely on exponential-time procedures. In this paper, we investigate graphical conditions to allow efficient identification in arbitrary linear structural causal models (SCMs).

Several recent publications report advances in training optimal decision trees (ODTs) using mixed-integer programs (MIPs), due to algorithmic advances in integer programming and a growing interest in addressing the inherent suboptimality of heuristic approaches such as CART. In this paper, we propose a novel MIP formulation, based on 1-norm support vector machine model, to train a binary oblique ODT for classification problems. We further present techniques, such as cutting planes, to tighten its linear relaxation, to improve run times to reach optimality. Using 36 datasets from the University of California Irvine Machine Learning Repository, we demonstrate that our training approach outperforms its counterparts from literature in terms of out-of-sample performance (around 10% improvement in mean out-of-sample testing accuracy). Towards our goal of developing a scalable framework to train multivariate ODT on large datasets, we propose a new linear programming based data selection method to choose a subset of the data, and use it to train a decision tree through our proposed MIP model.

We formulate a general framework for building structural causal models (SCMs) with deep learning components. The proposed approach employs normalising flows and variational inference to enable tractable inference of exogenous noise variables - a crucial step for counterfactual inference that is missing from existing deep causal learning methods. Our framework is validated on a synthetic dataset built on MNIST as well as on a real-world medical dataset of brain MRI scans. Our experimental results indicate that we can successfully train deep SCMs that are capable of all three levels of Pearl's ladder of causation: association, intervention, and counterfactuals, giving rise to a powerful new approach for answering causal questions in imaging applications and beyond.

The paper presents two nice ways for improving the usual gradient boosting algorithm where weak classifiers are decision trees. It is a paper oriented towards efficient (less costful) implementation of the usual algorithm in order to speed up the learning of decision trees by taking into account previous computations and sparse data. The approaches are interesting and smart. A risk bound is given for one of the improvements (GOSS), which seems sound but still quite loose: according to the experiments, a tighter bound could be obtained, getting rid of the "max" sizes of considered sets. No garantee is given for the second improvement (EFB) although is seems to be quite efficient in practice.

The paper works on testing the interventional closeness of two causal models defined on the same causal graph. This is a non-trivial problem and authors make several key observations that may be useful for further research in the field, not only for testing, but also for learning causal graphs and causal models. This is by far the best paper in my batch and I would like to thank the authors for the well-written manuscript. Section 1.3, titled "Overview of our techniques" is especially well written and nicely summarizes the approach. There are some typos, which I believe the authors will fix in the camera ready if the paper is accepted.

Their method requires an initial decision tree. The topology of this tree will be fixed, and only the decision rules at each node will be adjusted. The idea behind the proposed adjustment is based on the observation that, fixing all of the parameters of all the nodes except the parameters of node i, the likelihood function for the whole tree reduces to the likelihood function of a simple K-classes classifier. This simple classifier can be trained efficiently (using existing techniques) and doing so will always guarantee that the overall loss will decrease when compared to the loss for the initial decision tree.

Protecting the intellectual property of machine learning models is a hot topic and many watermarking schemes for deep neural networks have been proposed in the literature. Unfortunately, prior work largely neglected the investigation of watermarking techniques for other types of models, including decision tree ensembles, which are a state-of-the-art model for classification tasks on non-perceptual data. In this paper, we present the first watermarking scheme designed for decision tree ensembles, focusing in particular on random forest models. We discuss watermark creation and verification, presenting a thorough security analysis with respect to possible attacks. We finally perform an experimental evaluation of the proposed scheme, showing excellent results in terms of accuracy and security against the most relevant threats.

Timely disease diagnosis is challenging due to increasing disease burdens and limited clinician availability. AI shows promise in diagnosis accuracy but faces real-world application issues due to insufficient validation in clinical workflows and diverse populations. This study addresses gaps in medical AI downstream accountability through a case study on age-related macular degeneration (AMD) diagnosis and severity classification. We designed and implemented an AI-assisted diagnostic workflow for AMD, comparing diagnostic performance with and without AI assistance among 24 clinicians from 12 institutions with real patient data sampled from the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS). Additionally, we demonstrated continual enhancement of an existing AI model by incorporating approximately 40,000 additional medical images (named AREDS2 dataset). The improved model was then systematically evaluated using both AREDS and AREDS2 test sets, as well as an external test set from Singapore. AI assistance markedly enhanced diagnostic accuracy and classification for 23 out of 24 clinicians, with the average F1-score increasing by 20% from 37.71 (Manual) to 45.52 (Manual + AI) (P-value < 0.0001), achieving an improvement of over 50% in some cases. In terms of efficiency, AI assistance reduced diagnostic times for 17 out of the 19 clinicians tracked, with time savings of up to 40%. Furthermore, a model equipped with continual learning showed robust performance across three independent datasets, recording a 29% increase in accuracy, and elevating the F1-score from 42 to 54 in the Singapore population.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems have substantially improved dermatologists' diagnostic accuracy for melanoma, with explainable AI (XAI) systems further enhancing clinicians' confidence and trust in AI-driven decisions. Despite these advancements, there remains a critical need for objective evaluation of how dermatologists engage with both AI and XAI tools. In this study, 76 dermatologists participated in a reader study, diagnosing 16 dermoscopic images of melanomas and nevi using an XAI system that provides detailed, domain-specific explanations. Eye-tracking technology was employed to assess their interactions. Diagnostic performance was compared with that of a standard AI system lacking explanatory features. Our findings reveal that XAI systems improved balanced diagnostic accuracy by 2.8 percentage points relative to standard AI. Moreover, diagnostic disagreements with AI/XAI systems and complex lesions were associated with elevated cognitive load, as evidenced by increased ocular fixations. These insights have significant implications for clinical practice, the design of AI tools for visual tasks, and the broader development of XAI in medical diagnostics.