The brain modifies its synaptic strengths during learning in order to better adapt to its environment. However, the underlying plasticity rules that govern learning are unknown. Many proposals have been suggested, including Hebbian mechanisms, explicit error backpropagation, and a variety of alternatives. It is an open question as to what specific experimental measurements would need to be made to determine whether any given learning rule is operative in a real biological system. In this work, we take a virtual experimental approach to this problem.

We then take a discriminative approach, training linear and simple non-linear classifiers to identify learning rules from features based on these observables.

The brain modifies its synaptic strengths during learning in order to better adapt to its environment. However, the underlying plasticity rules that govern learning are unknown. Many proposals have been suggested, including Hebbian mechanisms, explicit error backpropagation, and a variety of alternatives. It is an open question as to what specific experimental measurements would need to be made to determine whether any given learning rule is operative in a real biological system. In this work, we take a "virtual experimental" approach to this problem.

Empirical inference attacks are a popular approach for evaluating the privacy risk of data release mechanisms in practice. While an active attack literature exists to evaluate machine learning models or synthetic data release, we currently lack comparable methods for fixed aggregate statistics, in particular when only a limited number of statistics are released. We here propose an inference attack framework against fixed aggregate statistics and an attribute inference attack called DeSIA. We instantiate DeSIA against the U.S. Census PPMF dataset and show it to strongly outperform reconstruction-based attacks. In particular, we show DeSIA to be highly effective at identifying vulnerable users, achieving a true positive rate of 0.14 at a false positive rate of $10^{-3}$. We then show DeSIA to perform well against users whose attributes cannot be verified and when varying the number of aggregate statistics and level of noise addition. We also perform an extensive ablation study of DeSIA and show how DeSIA can be successfully adapted to the membership inference task. Overall, our results show that aggregation alone is not sufficient to protect privacy, even when a relatively small number of aggregates are being released, and emphasize the need for formal privacy mechanisms and testing before aggregate statistics are released.

The brain modifies its synaptic strengths during learning in order to better adapt to its environment. However, the underlying plasticity rules that govern learning are unknown. Many proposals have been suggested, including Hebbian mechanisms, explicit error backpropagation, and a variety of alternatives. It is an open question as to what specific experimental measurements would need to be made to determine whether any given learning rule is operative in a real biological system. In this work, we take a "virtual experimental" approach to this problem.

Resettlement agencies have started to adopt data-driven algorithmic matching to match refugees to locations using employment rate as a measure of utility. Given a pool of refugees, data-driven algorithmic matching utilizes a classifier to predict the probability that each refugee would find employment at any given location. Then, it uses the predicted probabilities to estimate the expected utility of all possible placement decisions. Finally, it finds the placement decisions that maximize the predicted utility by solving a maximum weight bipartite matching problem. In this work, we argue that, using existing solutions, there may be pools of refugees for which data-driven algorithmic matching is (counterfactually) harmful -- it would have achieved lower utility than a given default policy used in the past, had it been used. Then, we develop a post-processing algorithm that, given placement decisions made by a default policy on a pool of refugees and their employment outcomes, solves an inverse~matching problem to minimally modify the predictions made by a given classifier. Under these modified predictions, the optimal matching policy that maximizes predicted utility on the pool is guaranteed to be not harmful. Further, we introduce a Transformer model that, given placement decisions made by a default policy on multiple pools of refugees and their employment outcomes, learns to modify the predictions made by a classifier so that the optimal matching policy that maximizes predicted utility under the modified predictions on an unseen pool of refugees is less likely to be harmful than under the original predictions. Experiments on simulated resettlement processes using synthetic refugee data created from a variety of publicly available data suggest that our methodology may be effective in making algorithmic placement decisions that are less likely to be harmful than existing solutions.

While extremely useful (e.g., for COVID-19 forecasting and policy-making, urban mobility analysis and marketing, and obtaining business insights), location data collected from mobile devices often contain data from a biased population subset, with some communities over or underrepresented in the collected datasets. As a result, aggregate statistics calculated from such datasets (as is done by various companies including Safegraph, Google, and Facebook), while ignoring the bias, leads to an inaccurate representation of population statistics. Such statistics will not only be generally inaccurate, but the error will disproportionately impact different population subgroups (e.g., because they ignore the underrepresented communities). This has dire consequences, as these datasets are used for sensitive decision-making such as COVID-19 policymaking. This paper tackles the problem of providing accurate population statistics using such biased datasets. We show that statistical debiasing, although in some cases useful, often fails to improve accuracy. We then propose BiasBuster, a neural network approach that utilizes the correlations between population statistics and location characteristics to provide accurate estimates of population statistics. Extensive experiments on real-world data show that BiasBuster improves accuracy by up to 2 times in general and up to 3 times for underrepresented populations.

Fairness, especially group fairness, is an important consideration in the context of machine learning systems. The most commonly adopted group fairness-enhancing techniques are in-processing methods that rely on a mixture of a fairness objective (e.g., demographic parity) and a task-specific objective (e.g., cross-entropy) during the training process. However, when data arrives in an online fashion - one instance at a time - optimizing such fairness objectives poses several challenges. In particular, group fairness objectives are defined using expectations of predictions across different demographic groups. In the online setting, where the algorithm has access to a single instance at a time, estimating the group fairness objective requires additional storage and significantly more computation (e.g., forward/backward passes) than the task-specific objective at every time step. In this paper, we propose Aranyani, an ensemble of oblique decision trees, to make fair decisions in online settings. The hierarchical tree structure of Aranyani enables parameter isolation and allows us to efficiently compute the fairness gradients using aggregate statistics of previous decisions, eliminating the need for additional storage and forward/backward passes. We also present an efficient framework to train Aranyani and theoretically analyze several of its properties. We conduct empirical evaluations on 5 publicly available benchmarks (including vision and language datasets) to show that Aranyani achieves a better accuracy-fairness trade-off compared to baseline approaches. Critical applications of machine learning, such as hiring (Dastin, 2022) and criminal recidivism (Larson et al., 2016), require special attention to avoid perpetuating biases present in training data (Corbett-Davies et al., 2017; Buolamwini & Gebru, 2018; Raji & Buolamwini, 2019). Group fairness, which is a well-studied paradigm for mitigating such biases in machine learning (Mehrabi et al., 2021; Hort et al., 2022), tries to achieve statistical parity of a system's predictions among different demographic (or protected) groups (e.g., gender or race). Most of these approaches rely on group fairness objectives that are optimized alongside task-specific objectives in an offline setting (Dwork et al., 2012). Group fairness objectives (e.g., demographic parity) are defined using expectations of predictions across different demographic groups, which requires the system to have access to labeled data from different groups.

Update: This made the top of Hacker News ( 600 points). Applying machine learning effectively is tricky. You need a robust pipeline to support your data flows. And most of all, you need high-quality labels. As a result, most of the time, my first iteration doesn't involve machine learning at all.