While deep learning models excel at predictive tasks, they often overfit due to their complex structure and large number of parameters, causing them to memorize training data, including noise, rather than learn patterns that generalize to new data. To tackle this challenge, this paper proposes a new regularization method, i.e., Enforcing Domain-Informed Monotonicity in Deep Neural Networks (DIM), which maintains domain-informed monotonic relationships in complex deep learning models to further improve predictions. Specifically, our method enforces monotonicity by penalizing violations relative to a linear baseline, effectively encouraging the model to follow expected trends while preserving its predictive power. We formalize this approach through a comprehensive mathematical framework that establishes a linear reference, measures deviations from monotonic behavior, and integrates these measurements into the training objective. We test and validate the proposed methodology using a real-world ridesourcing dataset from Chicago and a synthetically created dataset. Experiments across various neural network architectures show that even modest monotonicity constraints consistently enhance model performance. DIM enhances the predictive performance of deep neural networks by applying domain-informed monotonicity constraints to regularize model behavior and mitigate overfitting.

Algorithm fairness in the application of artificial intelligence (AI) is essential for a better society. As the foundational axiom of social mechanisms, fairness consists of multiple facets. Although the machine learning (ML) community has focused on intersectionality as a matter of statistical parity, especially in discrimination issues, an emerging body of literature addresses another facet -- monotonicity. Based on domain expertise, monotonicity plays a vital role in numerous fairness-related areas, where violations could misguide human decisions and lead to disastrous consequences. In this paper, we first systematically evaluate the significance of applying monotonic neural additive models (MNAMs), which use a fairness-aware ML algorithm to enforce both individual and pairwise monotonicity principles, for the fairness of AI ethics and society. We have found, through a hybrid method of theoretical reasoning, simulation, and extensive empirical analysis, that considering monotonicity axioms is essential in all areas of fairness, including criminology, education, health care, and finance. Our research contributes to the interdisciplinary research at the interface of AI ethics, explainable AI (XAI), and human-computer interactions (HCIs). By evidencing the catastrophic consequences if monotonicity is not met, we address the significance of monotonicity requirements in AI applications. Furthermore, we demonstrate that MNAMs are an effective fairness-aware ML approach by imposing monotonicity restrictions integrating human intelligence.

AI is fast becoming an amazing asset, having achieved superhuman levels of performance in domains such as image recognition, Go, and even poker. Many are excited about the future of AI and humanity. At the same time, there is a general sense that AI does suffer from one pesky flaw: AI in its current state can be unpredictably unreliable. The classical example is the Jeopardy! IBM Challenge, during which Watson, the IBM AI, cleaned the board with ease, only to miss the "Final Jeopardy!" question, which was under the category of US Cities: "Its largest airport is named for a World War II hero; its second largest for a World War II battle."

Being able to interpret, or explain, the predictions made by a machine learning model is of fundamental importance. This is especially true when there is interest in deploying data-driven models to make high-stakes decisions, e.g. in healthcare. While recent years have seen an increasing interest in interpretable machine learning research, this field is currently lacking an agreed-upon definition of interpretability, and some researchers have called for a more active conversation towards a rigorous approach to interpretability. Joining this conversation, we claim in this paper that the difficulty of interpreting a complex model stems from the existing interactions among features. We argue that by enforcing monotonicity between features and outputs, we are able to reason about the effect of a single feature on an output independently from other features, and consequently better understand the model. We show how to structurally introduce this constraint in deep learning models by adding new simple layers. We validate our model on benchmark datasets, and compare our results with previously proposed interpretable models.

Is accurate classification possible in the absence of hand-labeled data? This paper introduces the Monotonic Feature (MF) abstraction--where the probability of class membership increases monotonically with the MF's value. The paper proves that when an MF is given, PAC learning is possible with no hand-labeled data under certain assumptions. We argue that MFs arise naturally in a broad range of textual classification applications. On the classic "20 Newsgroups" data set, a learner given an MF and unlabeled data achieves classification accuracy equal to that of a state-of-the-art semi-supervised learner relying on 160 hand-labeled examples. Even when MFs are not given as input, their presence or absence can be determined from a small amount of hand-labeled data, which yields a new semi-supervised learning method that reduces error by 15% on the 20 Newsgroups data.

Is accurate classification possible in the absence of hand-labeled data? This paper introduces the Monotonic Feature (MF) abstraction--where the probability of class membership increases monotonically with the MF's value. The paper proves that when an MF is given, PAC learning is possible with no hand-labeled data under certain assumptions. We argue that MFs arise naturally in a broad range of textual classification applications. On the classic "20 Newsgroups" data set, a learner given an MF and unlabeled data achieves classification accuracy equal to that of a state-of-the-art semi-supervised learner relying on 160 hand-labeled examples. Even when MFs are not given as input, their presence or absence can be determined from a small amount of hand-labeled data, which yields a new semi-supervised learning method that reduces error by 15% on the 20 Newsgroups data.

Is accurate classification possible in the absence of hand-labeled data?