Petropoulos, Fotios, Apiletti, Daniele, Assimakopoulos, Vassilios, Babai, Mohamed Zied, Barrow, Devon K., Taieb, Souhaib Ben, Bergmeir, Christoph, Bessa, Ricardo J., Bijak, Jakub, Boylan, John E., Browell, Jethro, Carnevale, Claudio, Castle, Jennifer L., Cirillo, Pasquale, Clements, Michael P., Cordeiro, Clara, Oliveira, Fernando Luiz Cyrino, De Baets, Shari, Dokumentov, Alexander, Ellison, Joanne, Fiszeder, Piotr, Franses, Philip Hans, Frazier, David T., Gilliland, Michael, Gönül, M. Sinan, Goodwin, Paul, Grossi, Luigi, Grushka-Cockayne, Yael, Guidolin, Mariangela, Guidolin, Massimo, Gunter, Ulrich, Guo, Xiaojia, Guseo, Renato, Harvey, Nigel, Hendry, David F., Hollyman, Ross, Januschowski, Tim, Jeon, Jooyoung, Jose, Victor Richmond R., Kang, Yanfei, Koehler, Anne B., Kolassa, Stephan, Kourentzes, Nikolaos, Leva, Sonia, Li, Feng, Litsiou, Konstantia, Makridakis, Spyros, Martin, Gael M., Martinez, Andrew B., Meeran, Sheik, Modis, Theodore, Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos, Önkal, Dilek, Paccagnini, Alessia, Panagiotelis, Anastasios, Panapakidis, Ioannis, Pavía, Jose M., Pedio, Manuela, Pedregal, Diego J., Pinson, Pierre, Ramos, Patrícia, Rapach, David E., Reade, J. James, Rostami-Tabar, Bahman, Rubaszek, Michał, Sermpinis, Georgios, Shang, Han Lin, Spiliotis, Evangelos, Syntetos, Aris A., Talagala, Priyanga Dilini, Talagala, Thiyanga S., Tashman, Len, Thomakos, Dimitrios, Thorarinsdottir, Thordis, Todini, Ezio, Arenas, Juan Ramón Trapero, Wang, Xiaoqian, Winkler, Robert L., Yusupova, Alisa, Ziel, Florian
Forecasting has always been at the forefront of decision making and planning. The uncertainty that surrounds the future is both exciting and challenging, with individuals and organisations seeking to minimise risks and maximise utilities. The large number of forecasting applications calls for a diverse set of forecasting methods to tackle real-life challenges. This article provides a non-systematic review of the theory and the practice of forecasting. We provide an overview of a wide range of theoretical, state-of-the-art models, methods, principles, and approaches to prepare, produce, organise, and evaluate forecasts. We then demonstrate how such theoretical concepts are applied in a variety of real-life contexts. We do not claim that this review is an exhaustive list of methods and applications. However, we wish that our encyclopedic presentation will offer a point of reference for the rich work that has been undertaken over the last decades, with some key insights for the future of forecasting theory and practice. Given its encyclopedic nature, the intended mode of reading is non-linear. We offer cross-references to allow the readers to navigate through the various topics. We complement the theoretical concepts and applications covered by large lists of free or open-source software implementations and publicly-available databases.
Bommasani, Rishi, Hudson, Drew A., Adeli, Ehsan, Altman, Russ, Arora, Simran, von Arx, Sydney, Bernstein, Michael S., Bohg, Jeannette, Bosselut, Antoine, Brunskill, Emma, Brynjolfsson, Erik, Buch, Shyamal, Card, Dallas, Castellon, Rodrigo, Chatterji, Niladri, Chen, Annie, Creel, Kathleen, Davis, Jared Quincy, Demszky, Dora, Donahue, Chris, Doumbouya, Moussa, Durmus, Esin, Ermon, Stefano, Etchemendy, John, Ethayarajh, Kawin, Fei-Fei, Li, Finn, Chelsea, Gale, Trevor, Gillespie, Lauren, Goel, Karan, Goodman, Noah, Grossman, Shelby, Guha, Neel, Hashimoto, Tatsunori, Henderson, Peter, Hewitt, John, Ho, Daniel E., Hong, Jenny, Hsu, Kyle, Huang, Jing, Icard, Thomas, Jain, Saahil, Jurafsky, Dan, Kalluri, Pratyusha, Karamcheti, Siddharth, Keeling, Geoff, Khani, Fereshte, Khattab, Omar, Kohd, Pang Wei, Krass, Mark, Krishna, Ranjay, Kuditipudi, Rohith, Kumar, Ananya, Ladhak, Faisal, Lee, Mina, Lee, Tony, Leskovec, Jure, Levent, Isabelle, Li, Xiang Lisa, Li, Xuechen, Ma, Tengyu, Malik, Ali, Manning, Christopher D., Mirchandani, Suvir, Mitchell, Eric, Munyikwa, Zanele, Nair, Suraj, Narayan, Avanika, Narayanan, Deepak, Newman, Ben, Nie, Allen, Niebles, Juan Carlos, Nilforoshan, Hamed, Nyarko, Julian, Ogut, Giray, Orr, Laurel, Papadimitriou, Isabel, Park, Joon Sung, Piech, Chris, Portelance, Eva, Potts, Christopher, Raghunathan, Aditi, Reich, Rob, Ren, Hongyu, Rong, Frieda, Roohani, Yusuf, Ruiz, Camilo, Ryan, Jack, Ré, Christopher, Sadigh, Dorsa, Sagawa, Shiori, Santhanam, Keshav, Shih, Andy, Srinivasan, Krishnan, Tamkin, Alex, Taori, Rohan, Thomas, Armin W., Tramèr, Florian, Wang, Rose E., Wang, William, Wu, Bohan, Wu, Jiajun, Wu, Yuhuai, Xie, Sang Michael, Yasunaga, Michihiro, You, Jiaxuan, Zaharia, Matei, Zhang, Michael, Zhang, Tianyi, Zhang, Xikun, Zhang, Yuhui, Zheng, Lucia, Zhou, Kaitlyn, Liang, Percy
AI is undergoing a paradigm shift with the rise of models (e.g., BERT, DALL-E, GPT-3) that are trained on broad data at scale and are adaptable to a wide range of downstream tasks. We call these models foundation models to underscore their critically central yet incomplete character. This report provides a thorough account of the opportunities and risks of foundation models, ranging from their capabilities (e.g., language, vision, robotics, reasoning, human interaction) and technical principles(e.g., model architectures, training procedures, data, systems, security, evaluation, theory) to their applications (e.g., law, healthcare, education) and societal impact (e.g., inequity, misuse, economic and environmental impact, legal and ethical considerations). Though foundation models are based on standard deep learning and transfer learning, their scale results in new emergent capabilities,and their effectiveness across so many tasks incentivizes homogenization. Homogenization provides powerful leverage but demands caution, as the defects of the foundation model are inherited by all the adapted models downstream. Despite the impending widespread deployment of foundation models, we currently lack a clear understanding of how they work, when they fail, and what they are even capable of due to their emergent properties. To tackle these questions, we believe much of the critical research on foundation models will require deep interdisciplinary collaboration commensurate with their fundamentally sociotechnical nature.
Medical systems in general, and patient treatment decisions and outcomes in particular, are affected by bias based on gender and other demographic elements. As language models are increasingly applied to medicine, there is a growing interest in building algorithmic fairness into processes impacting patient care. Much of the work addressing this question has focused on biases encoded in language models -- statistical estimates of the relationships between concepts derived from distant reading of corpora. Building on this work, we investigate how word choices made by healthcare practitioners and language models interact with regards to bias. We identify and remove gendered language from two clinical-note datasets and describe a new debiasing procedure using BERT-based gender classifiers. We show minimal degradation in health condition classification tasks for low- to medium-levels of bias removal via data augmentation. Finally, we compare the bias semantically encoded in the language models with the bias empirically observed in health records. This work outlines an interpretable approach for using data augmentation to identify and reduce the potential for bias in natural language processing pipelines.
The emergence and continued reliance on the Internet and related technologies has resulted in the generation of large amounts of data that can be made available for analyses. However, humans do not possess the cognitive capabilities to understand such large amounts of data. Machine learning (ML) provides a mechanism for humans to process large amounts of data, gain insights about the behavior of the data, and make more informed decision based on the resulting analysis. ML has applications in various fields. This review focuses on some of the fields and applications such as education, healthcare, network security, banking and finance, and social media. Within these fields, there are multiple unique challenges that exist. However, ML can provide solutions to these challenges, as well as create further research opportunities. Accordingly, this work surveys some of the challenges facing the aforementioned fields and presents some of the previous literature works that tackled them. Moreover, it suggests several research opportunities that benefit from the use of ML to address these challenges.
The use of machine learning (ML) in health care raises numerous ethical concerns, especially as models can amplify existing health inequities. Here, we outline ethical considerations for equitable ML in the advancement of health care. Specifically, we frame ethics of ML in health care through the lens of social justice. We describe ongoing efforts and outline challenges in a proposed pipeline of ethical ML in health, ranging from problem selection to post-deployment considerations. We close by summarizing recommendations to address these challenges.
Its impact is drastic and real: Youtube's AIdriven recommendation system would present sports videos for days if one happens to watch a live baseball game on the platform ; email writing becomes much faster with machine learning (ML) based auto-completion ; many businesses have adopted natural language processing based chatbots as part of their customer services . AI has also greatly advanced human capabilities in complex decision-making processes ranging from determining how to allocate security resources to protect airports  to games such as poker  and Go . All such tangible and stunning progress suggests that an "AI summer" is happening. As some put it, "AI is the new electricity" . Meanwhile, in the past decade, an emerging theme in the AI research community is the so-called "AI for social good" (AI4SG): researchers aim at developing AI methods and tools to address problems at the societal level and improve the wellbeing of the society.
Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations.
One of the challenges in large-scale information retrieval (IR) is to develop fine-grained and domain-specific methods to answer natural language questions. Despite the availability of numerous sources and datasets for answer retrieval, Question Answering (QA) remains a challenging problem due to the difficulty of the question understanding and answer extraction tasks. One of the promising tracks investigated in QA is to map new questions to formerly answered questions that are `similar'. In this paper, we propose a novel QA approach based on Recognizing Question Entailment (RQE) and we describe the QA system and resources that we built and evaluated on real medical questions. First, we compare machine learning and deep learning methods for RQE using different kinds of datasets, including textual inference, question similarity and entailment in both the open and clinical domains. Second, we combine IR models with the best RQE method to select entailed questions and rank the retrieved answers. To study the end-to-end QA approach, we built the MedQuAD collection of 47,457 question-answer pairs from trusted medical sources, that we introduce and share in the scope of this paper. Following the evaluation process used in TREC 2017 LiveQA, we find that our approach exceeds the best results of the medical task with a 29.8% increase over the best official score. The evaluation results also support the relevance of question entailment for QA and highlight the effectiveness of combining IR and RQE for future QA efforts. Our findings also show that relying on a restricted set of reliable answer sources can bring a substantial improvement in medical QA.