To protect large-scale computing environments necessary to meet increasing computing demand, cloud providers have implemented security measures to monitor Operations and Maintenance (O&M) activities and therefore prevent data loss and service interruption. Command interception systems are used to intercept, assess, and block dangerous Command-line Interface (CLI) commands before they can cause damage. Traditional solutions for command risk assessment include rule-based systems, which require expert knowledge and constant human revision to account for unseen commands. To overcome these limitations, several end-to-end learning systems have been proposed to classify CLI commands. These systems, however, have several other limitations, including the adoption of general-purpose text classifiers, which may not adapt to the language characteristics of scripting languages such as Bash or PowerShell, and may not recognize dangerous commands in the presence of an unbalanced class distribution. In this paper, we propose a transformer-based command risk classification system, which leverages the generalization power of Large Language Models (LLM) to provide accurate classification and the ability to identify rare dangerous commands effectively, by exploiting the power of transfer learning. We verify the effectiveness of our approach on a realistic dataset of production commands and show how to apply our model for other security-related tasks, such as dangerous command interception and auditing of existing rule-based systems.

Recently, generative pre-training based models have demonstrated remarkable results on Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis (ABSA) task. However, previous works overemphasize crafting various templates to paraphrase training targets for enhanced decoding, ignoring the internal optimizations on generative models. Despite notable results achieved by these target-oriented optimization methods, they struggle with the complicated long texts since the implicit long-distance relation, e.g., aspect-opinion relation, is difficult to extract under the position embedding mechanism in generative models. Thus, in this paper, we first clarify the causes of the problem and introduce two sequence optimization strategies: the rule-based static optimization and the score-based dynamic optimization. The rule-based approach relies on handcraft priority of dependency relation to reorder the context, while the score-based algorithm dynamically regulates the contextual sequence by calculating word position scores using neural network. Based on the dynamic optimization structure, we further propose a unified Prompt-based Generative Sequence Optimization network (named PGSO), which jointly optimizes the training target as well as the generative model. Specifically, PGSO contains two components, namely, prompt construction and sequence regulator. The former constructs a task-specific prompt based on unsupervised training objects to fully utilize the pre-trained model. The latter jointly leverages semantic, syntactic and original-sequence information to dynamically regulate contextual sequence. Our experiments conducted on four ABSA tasks across multiple benchmarks indicate that PGSO outperforms state-of-the-art methods, with an average improvement of 3.52% in F1 score.

This paper explores null elements in English, Chinese, and Korean Penn treebanks. Null elements contain important syntactic and semantic information, yet they have typically been treated as entities to be removed during language processing tasks, particularly in constituency parsing. Thus, we work towards the removal and, in particular, the restoration of null elements in parse trees. We focus on expanding a rule-based approach utilizing linguistic context information to Chinese, as rule based approaches have historically only been applied to English. We also worked to conduct neural experiments with a language agnostic sequence-to-sequence model to recover null elements for English (PTB), Chinese (CTB) and Korean (KTB). To the best of the authors' knowledge, null elements in three different languages have been explored and compared for the first time. In expanding a rule based approach to Chinese, we achieved an overall F1 score of 80.00, which is comparable to past results in the CTB. In our neural experiments we achieved F1 scores up to 90.94, 85.38 and 88.79 for English, Chinese, and Korean respectively with functional labels.

When we speak, write or listen, we continuously make predictions based on our knowledge of a language's grammar. Remarkably, children acquire this grammatical knowledge within just a few years, enabling them to understand and generalise to novel constructions that have never been uttered before. Language models are powerful tools that create representations of language by incrementally predicting the next word in a sentence, and they have had a tremendous societal impact in recent years. The central research question of this thesis is whether these models possess a deep understanding of grammatical structure similar to that of humans. This question lies at the intersection of natural language processing, linguistics, and interpretability. To address it, we will develop novel interpretability techniques that enhance our understanding of the complex nature of large-scale language models. We approach our research question from three directions. First, we explore the presence of abstract linguistic information through structural priming, a key paradigm in psycholinguistics for uncovering grammatical structure in human language processing. Next, we examine various linguistic phenomena, such as adjective order and negative polarity items, and connect a model's comprehension of these phenomena to the data distribution on which it was trained. Finally, we introduce a controlled testbed for studying hierarchical structure in language models using various synthetic languages of increasing complexity and examine the role of feature interactions in modelling this structure. Our findings offer a detailed account of the grammatical knowledge embedded in language model representations and provide several directions for investigating fundamental linguistic questions using computational methods.

Checklists have been widely recognized as effective tools for completing complex tasks in a systematic manner. Although originally intended for use in procedural tasks, their interpretability and ease of use have led to their adoption for predictive tasks as well, including in clinical settings. However, designing checklists can be challenging, often requiring expert knowledge and manual rule design based on available data. Recent work has attempted to address this issue by using machine learning to automatically generate predictive checklists from data, although these approaches have been limited to Boolean data. We propose a novel method for learning predictive checklists from diverse data modalities, such as images and time series. Our approach relies on probabilistic logic programming, a learning paradigm that enables matching the discrete nature of checklist with continuous-valued data. We propose a regularization technique to tradeoff between the information captured in discrete concepts of continuous data and permit a tunable level of interpretability for the learned checklist concepts. We demonstrate that our method outperforms various explainable machine learning techniques on prediction tasks involving image sequences, time series, and clinical notes.

Recent advances in AI -- including generative approaches -- have resulted in technology that can support humans in scientific discovery and decision support but may also disrupt democracies and target individuals. The responsible use of AI increasingly shows the need for human-AI teaming, necessitating effective interaction between humans and machines. A crucial yet often overlooked aspect of these interactions is the different ways in which humans and machines generalise. In cognitive science, human generalisation commonly involves abstraction and concept learning. In contrast, AI generalisation encompasses out-of-domain generalisation in machine learning, rule-based reasoning in symbolic AI, and abstraction in neuro-symbolic AI. In this perspective paper, we combine insights from AI and cognitive science to identify key commonalities and differences across three dimensions: notions of generalisation, methods for generalisation, and evaluation of generalisation. We map the different conceptualisations of generalisation in AI and cognitive science along these three dimensions and consider their role in human-AI teaming. This results in interdisciplinary challenges across AI and cognitive science that must be tackled to provide a foundation for effective and cognitively supported alignment in human-AI teaming scenarios.

Extracting implicit knowledge and logical reasoning abilities from large language models (LLMs) has consistently been a significant challenge. The advancement of multi-agent systems has further en-hanced the capabilities of LLMs. Inspired by the structure of multi-polar neurons (MNs), we propose the XAgents framework, an in-terpretable multi-agent cooperative framework based on the IF-THEN rule-based system. The IF-Parts of the rules are responsible for logical reasoning and domain membership calculation, while the THEN-Parts are comprised of domain expert agents that generate domain-specific contents. Following the calculation of the member-ship, XAgetns transmits the task to the disparate domain rules, which subsequently generate the various responses. These re-sponses are analogous to the answers provided by different experts to the same question. The final response is reached at by eliminat-ing the hallucinations and erroneous knowledge of the LLM through membership computation and semantic adversarial genera-tion of the various domain rules. The incorporation of rule-based interpretability serves to bolster user confidence in the XAgents framework. We evaluate the efficacy of XAgents through a com-parative analysis with the latest AutoAgents, in which XAgents demonstrated superior performance across three distinct datasets. We perform post-hoc interpretable studies with SHAP algorithm and case studies, proving the interpretability of XAgent in terms of input-output feature correlation and rule-based semantics.

Most Deontic Logics take obligation as primitive and leave the others as derived from obligations. On the other hand, normative reasoning/legal theory identifies two different notions of permission: Strong Permission and Weak Permission. While the definitions of the types of permission vary, and other notions of permission have been proposed (for a discussion on the topic, see Hansson (2013)), often strong permission is taken as a derogation to a prohibition or the obligation to the contrary, and we have a weak permission when we fail to obtain the obligation of the contrary. Another way to look at the issue is whether there are norms that explicitly permit something. If there are and the norms are effective, then we obtain an explicit (strong) permission.

We introduce a method to measure the alignment between public will and language model (LM) behavior that can be applied to fine-tuning, online oversight, and pre-release safety checks. Our `chain of alignment' (CoA) approach produces a rule based reward (RBR) by creating model behavior $\textit{rules}$ aligned to normative $\textit{objectives}$ aligned to $\textit{public will}$. This factoring enables a nonexpert public to directly specify their will through the normative objectives, while expert intelligence is used to figure out rules entailing model behavior that best achieves those objectives. We validate our approach by applying it across three different domains of LM prompts related to mental health. We demonstrate a public input process built on collective dialogues and bridging-based ranking that reliably produces normative objectives supported by at least $96\% \pm 2\%$ of the US public. We then show that rules developed by mental health experts to achieve those objectives enable a RBR that evaluates an LM response's alignment with the objectives similarly to human experts (Pearson's $r=0.841$, $AUC=0.964$). By measuring alignment with objectives that have near unanimous public support, these CoA RBRs provide an approximate measure of alignment between LM behavior and public will.

Formulating an effective constraint model of a parameterised problem class is crucial to the efficiency with which instances of the class can subsequently be solved. It is difficult to know beforehand which of a set of candidate models will perform best in practice. This paper presents a system that employs graph rewriting to reformulate an input model for improved performance automatically. By situating our work in the Essence abstract constraint specification language, we can use the structure in its high level variable types to trigger rewrites directly. We implement our system via rewrite rules expressed in the Graph Programs 2 language, applied to the abstract syntax tree of an input specification. We show how to automatically translate the solution of the reformulated problem into a solution of the original problem for verification and presentation. We demonstrate the efficacy of our system with a detailed case study.