However, the complexity and versatility of modern AI systems calls for a unified framework to assess their trustworthiness, which cannot The probabilistic formal verification (PFV) of be captured by a single evaluation metric or formal property. AI systems is in its infancy. So far, approaches This papers aims to introduce such a framework. We have been limited to ad-hoc algorithms for specific show how by leveraging the Weighted Model Integration classes of models and/or properties. We propose (WMI) [Belle et al., 2015] formalism, it is possible to devise a unifying framework for the PFV of AI systems a unified formulation for the probabilistic verification of based on Weighted Model Integration (WMI), combinatorial AI systems. Broadly speaking, WMI is the which allows to frame the problem in very general task of computing probabilities of arbitrary combinations terms. Crucially, this reduction enables the verification of logical and algebraic constraints given a structured joint of many properties of interest, like fairness, distribution over both continuous and discrete variables.

Over the last decade, several regulatory bodies have started requiring the disclosure of non-financial information from publicly listed companies, in light of the investors' increasing attention to Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) issues. Publicly released information on sustainability practices is often disclosed in diverse, unstructured, and multi-modal documentation. This poses a challenge in efficiently gathering and aligning the data into a unified framework to derive insights related to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Thus, using Information Extraction (IE) methods becomes an intuitive choice for delivering insightful and actionable data to stakeholders. In this study, we employ Large Language Models (LLMs), In-Context Learning, and the Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) paradigm to extract structured insights related to ESG aspects from companies' sustainability reports. We then leverage graph-based representations to conduct statistical analyses concerning the extracted insights. These analyses revealed that ESG criteria cover a wide range of topics, exceeding 500, often beyond those considered in existing categorizations, and are addressed by companies through a variety of initiatives. Moreover, disclosure similarities emerged among companies from the same region or sector, validating ongoing hypotheses in the ESG literature. Lastly, by incorporating additional company attributes into our analyses, we investigated which factors impact the most on companies' ESG ratings, showing that ESG disclosure affects the obtained ratings more than other financial or company data.

We initiate the study of Neuro-Symbolic Continual Learning (NeSy-CL), in which the goal is to solve a sequence We introduce Neuro-Symbolic Continual Learning, of neuro-symbolic tasks. As is common in neuro-symbolic where a model has to solve a sequence of (NeSy) prediction (Manhaeve et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2018; neuro-symbolic tasks, that is, it has to map subsymbolic Giunchiglia & Lukasiewicz, 2020; Hoernle et al., 2022; inputs to high-level concepts and compute Ahmed et al., 2022a), the machine is provided prior knowledge predictions by reasoning consistently with relating one or more target labels to symbolic, highlevel prior knowledge. Our key observation is that concepts extracted from sub-symbolic data, and has to neuro-symbolic tasks, although different, often compute a prediction by reasoning over said concepts. The share concepts whose semantics remains stable central challenge of Nesy-CL is that the data distribution over time. Traditional approaches fall short: existing and the knowledge may vary across tasks. E.g., in medical continual strategies ignore knowledge altogether, diagnosis knowledge may encode known relationships between while stock neuro-symbolic architectures possible symptoms and conditions, while different suffer from catastrophic forgetting. We show that tasks are characterized by different distributions of X-ray leveraging prior knowledge by combining neurosymbolic scans, symptoms and conditions. The goal, as in continual architectures with continual strategies learning (CL) (Parisi et al., 2019), is to obtain a model that does help avoid catastrophic forgetting, but also attains high accuracy on new tasks without forgetting what that doing so can yield models affected by reasoning it has already learned under a limited storage budget.

Neuro-Symbolic (NeSy) predictive models hold the promise of improved compliance with given constraints, systematic generalization, and interpretability, as they allow to infer labels that are consistent with some prior knowledge by reasoning over high-level concepts extracted from sub-symbolic inputs. It was recently shown that NeSy predictors are affected by reasoning shortcuts: they can attain high accuracy but by leveraging concepts with unintended semantics, thus coming short of their promised advantages. Yet, a systematic characterization of reasoning shortcuts and of potential mitigation strategies is missing. This work fills this gap by characterizing them as unintended optima of the learning objective and identifying four key conditions behind their occurrence. Based on this, we derive several natural mitigation strategies, and analyze their efficacy both theoretically and empirically. Our analysis shows reasoning shortcuts are difficult to deal with, casting doubts on the trustworthiness and interpretability of existing NeSy solutions.

Existing multi-relational graph neural networks use one of two strategies for identifying informative relations: either they reduce this problem to low-level weight learning, or they rely on handcrafted chains of relational dependencies, called meta-paths. However, the former approach faces challenges in the presence of many relations (e.g., knowledge graphs), while the latter requires substantial domain expertise to identify relevant meta-paths. In this work we propose a novel approach to learn meta-paths and meta-path GNNs that are highly accurate based on a small number of informative meta-paths. Key element of our approach is a scoring function for measuring the potential informativeness of a relation in the incremental construction of the meta-path. Our experimental evaluation shows that the approach manages to correctly identify relevant meta-paths even with a large number of relations, and substantially outperforms existing multi-relational GNNs on synthetic and real-world experiments.

Focus in Explainable AI is shifting from explanations defined in terms of low-level elements, such as input features, to explanations encoded in terms of interpretable concepts learned from data. How to reliably acquire such concepts is, however, still fundamentally unclear. An agreed-upon notion of concept interpretability is missing, with the result that concepts used by both post-hoc explainers and concept-based neural networks are acquired through a variety of mutually incompatible strategies. Critically, most of these neglect the human side of the problem: a representation is understandable only insofar as it can be understood by the human at the receiving end. The key challenge in Human-interpretable Representation Learning (HRL) is how to model and operationalize this human element. In this work, we propose a mathematical framework for acquiring interpretable representations suitable for both post-hoc explainers and concept-based neural networks. Our formalization of HRL builds on recent advances in causal representation learning and explicitly models a human stakeholder as an external observer. This allows us to derive a principled notion of alignment between the machine representation and the vocabulary of concepts understood by the human. In doing so, we link alignment and interpretability through a simple and intuitive name transfer game, and clarify the relationship between alignment and a well-known property of representations, namely disentanglment. We also show that alignment is linked to the issue of undesirable correlations among concepts, also known as concept leakage, and to content-style separation, all through a general information-theoretic reformulation of these properties. Our conceptualization aims to bridge the gap between the human and algorithmic sides of interpretability and establish a stepping stone for new research on human-interpretable representations.

Consider the problem of diagnosing lung pathologies based on the outcome of an X-ray scan. This task cannot be fully automated, for safety reasons, necessitating human supervision at some step of the process. At the same time, it is difficult for human experts to tackle it alone due to how sensitive the decision is, especially under time pressure. High-stakes tasks like this are natural candidates for hybrid decision making (HDM) approaches that support human decision makers by leveraging AI technology for the purpose of improving decision quality and lowering cognitive effort, without compromising control. Most current approaches to HDM rely on a learning to defer (LTD) setup, in which a machine learning model first assesses whether a decision can be taken in autonomy - i.e., it is either safe or can be answered with confidence - and defers it to a human partner whenever this is not the case [Madras et al., 2018, Mozannar and Sontag, 2020, Keswani et al., 2022, Verma and Nalisnick, 2022, Liu et al., 2022]. Other forms of HDM, like learning to complement [Wilder et al., 2021], prediction under human assistance [De et al., 2020], and algorithmic triage [Raghu et al., 2019, Okati et al., 2021] follow a similar pattern.

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have become the leading paradigm for learning on (static) graph-structured data. However, many real-world systems are dynamic in nature, since the graph and node/edge attributes change over time. In recent years, GNN-based models for temporal graphs have emerged as a promising area of research to extend the capabilities of GNNs. In this work, we provide the first comprehensive overview of the current state-of-the-art of temporal GNN, introducing a rigorous formalization of learning settings and tasks and a novel taxonomy categorizing existing approaches in terms of how the temporal aspect is represented and processed. We conclude the survey with a discussion of the most relevant open challenges for the field, from both research and application perspectives.

Following a fast initial breakthrough in graph based learning, Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have reached a widespread application in many science and engineering fields, prompting the need for methods to understand their decision process. GNN explainers have started to emerge in recent years, with a multitude of methods both novel or adapted from other domains. To sort out this plethora of alternative approaches, several studies have benchmarked the performance of different explainers in terms of various explainability metrics. However, these earlier works make no attempts at providing insights into why different GNN architectures are more or less explainable, or which explainer should be preferred in a given setting. In this survey, we fill these gaps by devising a systematic experimental study, which tests ten explainers on eight representative architectures trained on six carefully designed graph and node classification datasets. With our results we provide key insights on the choice and applicability of GNN explainers, we isolate key components that make them usable and successful and provide recommendations on how to avoid common interpretation pitfalls. We conclude by highlighting open questions and directions of possible future research.

Algorithmic Recourse (AR) is the problem of computing a sequence of actions that -- once performed by a user -- overturns an undesirable machine decision. It is paramount that the sequence of actions does not require too much effort for users to implement. Yet, most approaches to AR assume that actions cost the same for all users, and thus may recommend unfairly expensive recourse plans to certain users. Prompted by this observation, we introduce PEAR, the first human-in-the-loop approach capable of providing personalized algorithmic recourse tailored to the needs of any end-user. PEAR builds on insights from Bayesian Preference Elicitation to iteratively refine an estimate of the costs of actions by asking choice set queries to the target user. The queries themselves are computed by maximizing the Expected Utility of Selection, a principled measure of information gain accounting for uncertainty on both the cost estimate and the user's responses. PEAR integrates elicitation into a Reinforcement Learning agent coupled with Monte Carlo Tree Search to quickly identify promising recourse plans. Our empirical evaluation on real-world datasets highlights how PEAR produces high-quality personalized recourse in only a handful of iterations.