As we make tremendous advances in machine learning and artificial intelligence technosciences, there is a renewed understanding in the AI community that we must ensure that humans being are at the center of our deliberations so that we don't end in technology-induced dystopias. As strongly argued by Green in his book Smart Enough City, the incorporation of technology in city environs does not automatically translate into prosperity, wellbeing, urban livability, or social justice. There is a great need to deliberate on the future of the cities worth living and designing. There are philosophical and ethical questions involved along with various challenges that relate to the security, safety, and interpretability of AI algorithms that will form the technological bedrock of future cities. Several research institutes on human centered AI have been established at top international universities. Globally there are calls for technology to be made more humane and human-compatible. For example, Stuart Russell has a book called Human Compatible AI. The Center for Humane Technology advocates for regulators and technology companies to avoid business models and product features that contribute to social problems such as extremism, polarization, misinformation, and Internet addiction. In this paper, we analyze and explore key challenges including security, robustness, interpretability, and ethical challenges to a successful deployment of AI or ML in human-centric applications, with a particular emphasis on the convergence of these challenges. We provide a detailed review of existing literature on these key challenges and analyze how one of these challenges may lead to others or help in solving other challenges. The paper also advises on the current limitations, pitfalls, and future directions of research in these domains, and how it can fill the current gaps and lead to better solutions.
TL;DR -- Amidst intentions of generating brilliant statistical analyses and breakthroughs in machine learning, don't get tripped up by these five common mistakes in the Data Science planning process. As a Federal consultant, I work with U.S. government agencies that conduct scientific research, support veterans, offer medical services, and maintain healthcare supply chains. Data Science can be a very important tool to help these teams advance their mission-driven work. I'm deeply invested in making sure we don't waste time and energy on Data Science models that: Based on my experience, I'm sharing hard-won lessons about five missteps in the Data Science planning process -- shortfalls that you can avoid if you follow these recommendations. Just like the visible light spectrum, the work we do as Data Scientists constitutes a small portion of a broader range.
America is facing a health care crisis primarily due to its aging population. Physician shortages have come to the forefront recently, as many hospitals are overwhelmed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In truth, our looming physician shortage is a generation in the making, as baby boomer doctors retire in droves. This is all occurring as lifespans are increasing--hence, there are fewer doctors to treat more patients. Exacerbating the problem is that medical schools are not churning out medical students fast enough due to capacity constraints, and it takes 12 to 15 years to train a doctor. Today, more than half of active physicians are older than 55, and by the year 2032, the Association of American Medical Colleges projects a shortfall of 122,000 doctors in the United States.
High-dimensional representations for words, text, images, knowledge graphs and other structured data are commonly used in different paradigms of machine learning and data mining. These representations have different degrees of interpretability, with efficient distributed representations coming at the cost of the loss of feature to dimension mapping. This implies that there is obfuscation in the way concepts are captured in these embedding spaces. Its effects are seen in many representations and tasks, one particularly problematic one being in language representations where the societal biases, learned from underlying data, are captured and occluded in unknown dimensions and subspaces. As a result, invalid associations (such as different races and their association with a polar notion of good versus bad) are made and propagated by the representations, leading to unfair outcomes in different tasks where they are used. This work addresses some of these problems pertaining to the transparency and interpretability of such representations. A primary focus is the detection, quantification, and mitigation of socially biased associations in language representation.
In the Internet of Things (IoT) era, billions of sensors and devices collect and process data from the environment, transmit them to cloud centers, and receive feedback via the internet for connectivity and perception. However, transmitting massive amounts of heterogeneous data, perceiving complex environments from these data, and then making smart decisions in a timely manner are difficult. Artificial intelligence (AI), especially deep learning, is now a proven success in various areas including computer vision, speech recognition, and natural language processing. AI introduced into the IoT heralds the era of artificial intelligence of things (AIoT). This paper presents a comprehensive survey on AIoT to show how AI can empower the IoT to make it faster, smarter, greener, and safer. Specifically, we briefly present the AIoT architecture in the context of cloud computing, fog computing, and edge computing. Then, we present progress in AI research for IoT from four perspectives: perceiving, learning, reasoning, and behaving. Next, we summarize some promising applications of AIoT that are likely to profoundly reshape our world. Finally, we highlight the challenges facing AIoT and some potential research opportunities.
Neural abstractive summarization systems have achieved promising progress, thanks to the availability of large-scale datasets and models pre-trained with self-supervised methods. However, ensuring the factual consistency of the generated summaries for abstractive summarization systems is a challenge. We propose a post-editing corrector module to address this issue by identifying and correcting factual errors in generated summaries. The neural corrector model is pre-trained on artificial examples that are created by applying a series of heuristic transformations on reference summaries. These transformations are inspired by an error analysis of state-of-the-art summarization model outputs. Experimental results show that our model is able to correct factual errors in summaries generated by other neural summarization models and outperforms previous models on factual consistency evaluation on the CNN/DailyMail dataset. We also find that transferring from artificial error correction to downstream settings is still very challenging.
To drive progress in the field of data science, we propose 10 challenge areas for the research community to pursue. Since data science is broad, with methods drawing from computer science, statistics, and other disciplines, and with applications appearing in all sectors, these challenge areas speak to the breadth of issues spanning science, technology, and society. We preface our enumeration with meta-questions about whether data science is a discipline. We then describe each of the 10 challenge areas. The goal of this article is to start a discussion on what could constitute a basis for a research agenda in data science, while recognizing that the field of data science is still evolving. Although data science builds on knowledge from computer science, engineering, mathematics, statistics, and other disciplines, data science is a unique field with many mysteries to unlock: fundamental scientific questions and pressing problems of societal importance.
Machine learning is increasingly used to inform decision-making in sensitive situations where decisions have consequential effects on individuals' lives. In these settings, in addition to requiring models to be accurate and robust, socially relevant values such as fairness, privacy, accountability, and explainability play an important role for the adoption and impact of said technologies. In this work, we focus on algorithmic recourse, which is concerned with providing explanations and recommendations to individuals who are unfavourably treated by automated decision-making systems. We first perform an extensive literature review, and align the efforts of many authors by presenting unified definitions, formulations, and solutions to recourse. Then, we provide an overview of the prospective research directions towards which the community may engage, challenging existing assumptions and making explicit connections to other ethical challenges such as security, privacy, and fairness.
The TriRhenaTech alliance presents a collection of accepted papers of the cancelled tri-national 'Upper-Rhine Artificial Inteeligence Symposium' planned for 13th May 2020 in Karlsruhe. The TriRhenaTech alliance is a network of universities in the Upper-Rhine Trinational Metropolitan Region comprising of the German universities of applied sciences in Furtwangen, Kaiserslautern, Karlsruhe, and Offenburg, the Baden-Wuerttemberg Cooperative State University Loerrach, the French university network Alsace Tech (comprised of 14 'grandes \'ecoles' in the fields of engineering, architecture and management) and the University of Applied Sciences and Arts Northwestern Switzerland. The alliance's common goal is to reinforce the transfer of knowledge, research, and technology, as well as the cross-border mobility of students.
Data-driven predictive models are increasingly used in education to support students, instructors, and administrators. However, there are concerns about the fairness of the predictions and uses of these algorithmic systems. In this introduction to algorithmic fairness in education, we draw parallels to prior literature on educational access, bias, and discrimination, and we examine core components of algorithmic systems (measurement, model learning, and action) to identify sources of bias and discrimination in the process of developing and deploying these systems. Statistical, similarity-based, and causal notions of fairness are reviewed and contrasted in the way they apply in educational contexts. Recommendations for policy makers and developers of educational technology offer guidance for how to promote algorithmic fairness in education.