In this paper we propose a novel method that provides contrastive explanations justifying the classification of an input by a black box classifier such as a deep neuralnetwork.

This allows us to derive an upper bound on the susceptibility of explanations to manipulations.

Recall from 1 that this involved twocharacteristics.

Understanding how these systems arrive at their decisions is a necessary first step before these biases can be corrected.

B: Overview of the proposed PhiSNet architecture.

MIL has become particularly popular in histopathology, where gigapixel microscopy slides are cut into patches representing small tissue regions.

We investigate whether post-hoc model explanations are effective for diagnosing model errors-model debugging. In response to the challenge of explaining a model's prediction, a vast array of explanation methods have been proposed. Despite increasing use, it is unclear if they are effective. To start, we categorizebugs,based on their source, into: data, model, and test-timecontamination bugs.

Transfer learning is a powerful paradigm for leveraging knowledge from source domains to enhance learning in a target domain. However, traditional transfer learning approaches often focus on scalar or multivariate data within Euclidean spaces, limiting their applicability to complex data structures such as probability distributions. To address this limitation, we introduce a novel transfer learning framework for regression models whose outputs are probability distributions residing in the Wasserstein space. When the informative subset of transferable source domains is known, we propose an estimator with provable asymptotic convergence rates, quantifying the impact of domain similarity on transfer efficiency. For cases where the informative subset is unknown, we develop a data-driven transfer learning procedure designed to mitigate negative transfer. The proposed methods are supported by rigorous theoretical analysis and are validated through extensive simulations and real-world applications. The code is available at https://github.com/h7nian/WaTL

There is, in some quarters, concern about high-level machine intelligence and superintelligent AI coming up in a few decades, bringing with it significant risks for humanity. In other quarters, these issues are ignored or considered science fiction. We wanted to clarify what the distribution of opinions actually is, what probability the best experts currently assign to high-level machine intelligence coming up within a particular time-frame, which risks they see with that development, and how fast they see these developing. We thus designed a brief questionnaire and distributed it to four groups of experts in 2012/2013. The median estimate of respondents was for a one in two chance that high-level machine intelligence will be developed around 2040-2050, rising to a nine in ten chance by 2075. Experts expect that systems will move on to superintelligence in less than 30 years thereafter. They estimate the chance is about one in three that this development turns out to be 'bad' or 'extremely bad' for humanity.