Machine learning (ML) has achieved remarkable success in prediction tasks. In many real-world scenarios, rather than solely predicting an outcome using an ML model, the crucial concern is how to make decisions to prevent the occurrence of undesired outcomes, known as the problem. To this end, a new framework called has been proposed recently, which works effectively in stationary environments by leveraging the influence relations among variables. In real tasks, however, the environments are usually non-stationary, where the influence relations may be, leading to the failure of AUF by the existing method. In this paper, we introduce a novel sequential methodology that effectively updates the estimates of dynamic influence relations, which are crucial for rehearsal learning to prevent undesired outcomes in non-stationary environments. Meanwhile, we take the cost of decision actions into account and provide the formulation of AUF problem with minimal action cost under non-stationarity. We prove that in linear Gaussian cases, the problem can be transformed into the well-studied convex quadratically constrained quadratic program (QCQP). In this way, we establish the first polynomial-time rehearsal-based approach for addressing the AUF problem.

Machine learning (ML) has achieved remarkable success in prediction tasks. In many real-world scenarios, rather than solely predicting an outcome using an ML model, the crucial concern is how to make decisions to prevent the occurrence of undesired outcomes, known as the avoiding undesired future (AUF) problem. To this end, a new framework called rehearsal learning has been proposed recently, which works effectively in stationary environments by leveraging the influence relations among variables. In real tasks, however, the environments are usually non-stationary, where the influence relations may be dynamic, leading to the failure of AUF by the existing method. In this paper, we introduce a novel sequential methodology that effectively updates the estimates of dynamic influence relations, which are crucial for rehearsal learning to prevent undesired outcomes in non-stationary environments.

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems increasingly influence decision-making across various fields, the need to attribute responsibility for undesirable outcomes has become essential, though complicated by the complex interplay between humans and AI. Existing attribution methods based on actual causality and Shapley values tend to disproportionately blame agents who contribute more to an outcome and rely on real-world measures of blameworthiness that may misalign with responsible AI standards. This paper presents a causal framework using Structural Causal Models (SCMs) to systematically attribute responsibility in human-AI systems, measuring overall blameworthiness while employing counterfactual reasoning to account for agents' expected epistemic levels. Two case studies illustrate the framework's adaptability in diverse human-AI collaboration scenarios.

Machine learning models are increasingly used in areas such as loan approvals and hiring, yet they often function as black boxes, obscuring their decision-making processes. Transparency is crucial, and individuals need explanations to understand decisions, especially for the ones not desired by the user. Ethical and legal considerations require informing individuals of changes in input attribute values (features) that could lead to a desired outcome for the user. Our work aims to generate counterfactual explanations by considering causal dependencies between features. We present the CoGS (Counterfactual Generation with s(CASP)) framework that utilizes the goal-directed Answer Set Programming system s(CASP) to generate counterfactuals from rule-based machine learning models, specifically the FOLD-SE algorithm. CoGS computes realistic and causally consistent changes to attribute values taking causal dependencies between them into account. It finds a path from an undesired outcome to a desired one using counterfactuals.

Machine learning models that automate decision-making are increasingly used in consequential areas such as loan approvals, pretrial bail approval, and hiring. Unfortunately, most of these models are black boxes, i.e., they are unable to reveal how they reach these prediction decisions. A need for transparency demands justification for such predictions. An affected individual might also desire explanations to understand why a decision was made. Ethical and legal considerations require informing the individual of changes in the input attribute (s) that could be made to produce a desirable outcome. Our work focuses on the latter problem of generating counterfactual explanations by considering the causal dependencies between features. In this paper, we present the framework CFGs, CounterFactual Generation with s(CASP), which utilizes the goal-directed Answer Set Programming (ASP) system s(CASP) to automatically generate counterfactual explanations from models generated by rule-based machine learning algorithms in particular. We benchmark CFGs with the FOLD-SE model. Reaching the counterfactual state from the initial state is planned and achieved using a series of interventions. To validate our proposal, we show how counterfactual explanations are computed and justified by imagining worlds where some or all factual assumptions are altered/changed. More importantly, we show how CFGs navigates between these worlds, namely, go from our initial state where we obtain an undesired outcome to the imagined goal state where we obtain the desired decision, taking into account the causal relationships among features.

Machine learning models that automate decision-making are increasingly being used in consequential areas such as loan approvals, pretrial bail approval, hiring, and many more. Unfortunately, most of these models are black-boxes, i.e., they are unable to reveal how they reach these prediction decisions. A need for transparency demands justification for such predictions. An affected individual might also desire explanations to understand why a decision was made. Ethical and legal considerations may further require informing the individual of changes in the input attribute that could be made to produce a desirable outcome. This paper focuses on the latter problem of automatically generating counterfactual explanations. We propose a framework Counterfactual Generation with s(CASP) (CFGS) that utilizes answer set programming (ASP) and the s(CASP) goal-directed ASP system to automatically generate counterfactual explanations from rules generated by rule-based machine learning (RBML) algorithms. In our framework, we show how counterfactual explanations are computed and justified by imagining worlds where some or all factual assumptions are altered/changed. More importantly, we show how we can navigate between these worlds, namely, go from our original world/scenario where we obtain an undesired outcome to the imagined world/scenario where we obtain a desired/favourable outcome.

Prescriptive process monitoring methods seek to improve the performance of a process by selectively triggering interventions at runtime (e.g., offering a discount to a customer) to increase the probability of a desired case outcome (e.g., a customer making a purchase). The backbone of a prescriptive process monitoring method is an intervention policy, which determines for which cases and when an intervention should be executed. Existing methods in this field rely on predictive models to define intervention policies; specifically, they consider policies that trigger an intervention when the estimated probability of a negative outcome exceeds a threshold. However, the probabilities computed by a predictive model may come with a high level of uncertainty (low confidence), leading to unnecessary interventions and, thus, wasted effort. This waste is particularly problematic when the resources available to execute interventions are limited. To tackle this shortcoming, this paper proposes an approach to extend existing prescriptive process monitoring methods with so-called conformal predictions, i.e., predictions with confidence guarantees. An empirical evaluation using real-life public datasets shows that conformal predictions enhance the net gain of prescriptive process monitoring methods under limited resources.

Ethical artificial intelligence (AI) focuses on values, principles, and techniques that promote moral conduct and regulatory framework, which benefit humanity as a whole. It also prevents the malicious use of AI technology in deepening inequalities and divides. A roadmap to trusting artificial intelligence (AI) is important. Lack of trust is why many companies have not adopted AI into their business frameworks. The fear of the unknown runs deep – just as I felt on Vatnajökull – and the unknown behind technology is oftentimes immense, teeming with frightening possibilities.

Prescriptive process monitoring is a family of techniques to optimize the performance of a business process by triggering interventions at runtime. Existing prescriptive process monitoring techniques assume that the number of interventions that may be triggered is unbounded. In practice, though, specific interventions consume resources with finite capacity. For example, in a loan origination process, an intervention may consist of preparing an alternative loan offer to increase the applicant's chances of taking a loan. This intervention requires a certain amount of time from a credit officer, and thus, it is not possible to trigger this intervention in all cases. This paper proposes a prescriptive process monitoring technique that triggers interventions to optimize a cost function under fixed resource constraints. The proposed technique relies on predictive modeling to identify cases that are likely to lead to a negative outcome, in combination with causal inference to estimate the effect of an intervention on the outcome of the case. These outputs are then used to allocate resources to interventions to maximize a cost function. A preliminary empirical evaluation suggests that the proposed approach produces a higher net gain than a purely predictive (non-causal) baseline.

Predictive process monitoring is a family of techniques to analyze events produced during the execution of a business process in order to predict the future state or the final outcome of running process instances. Existing techniques in this field are able to predict, at each step of a process instance, the likelihood that it will lead to an undesired outcome.These techniques, however, focus on generating predictions and do not prescribe when and how process workers should intervene to decrease the cost of undesired outcomes. This paper proposes a framework for prescriptive process monitoring, which extends predictive monitoring with the ability to generate alarms that trigger interventions to prevent an undesired outcome or mitigate its effect. The framework incorporates a parameterized cost model to assess the cost-benefit trade-off of generating alarms. We show how to optimize the generation of alarms given an event log of past process executions and a set of cost model parameters. The proposed approaches are empirically evaluated using a range of real-life event logs. The experimental results show that the net cost of undesired outcomes can be minimized by changing the threshold for generating alarms, as the process instance progresses. Moreover, introducing delays for triggering alarms, instead of triggering them as soon as the probability of an undesired outcome exceeds a threshold, leads to lower net costs.