For example, one line of work extends traditional fairness in LLMs involves unique backgrounds, taxonomies, and fairness notions--individual fairness and group fairness--to these fulfillment techniques. This tutorial provides a systematic overview models[6]. Specifically, individual fairness seeks to ensure similar of recent advances in the literature concerning fair LLMs, beginning outcomes for similar individuals [13, 49], while group fairness focuses with real-world case studies to introduce LLMs, followed by on equalizing outcome statistics across subgroups defined by an analysis of bias causes therein. The concept of fairness in LLMs sensitive attributes [18, 44-46] (e.g., gender or race). While these is then explored, summarizing the strategies for evaluating bias classification-based fairness notions are adept at evaluating bias in and the algorithms designed to promote fairness. Additionally, resources LLM's classification results[6], they fall short in addressing biases for assessing bias in LLMs, including toolkits and datasets, that arise during the LLM generation process[20].

In the rapidly evolving landscape of generative artificial intelligence (AI), the increasingly pertinent issue of copyright infringement arises as AI advances to generate content from scraped copyrighted data, prompting questions about ownership and protection that impact professionals across various careers. With this in mind, this survey provides an extensive examination of copyright infringement as it pertains to generative AI, aiming to stay abreast of the latest developments and open problems. Specifically, it will first outline methods of detecting copyright infringement in mediums such as text, image, and video. Next, it will delve an exploration of existing techniques aimed at safeguarding copyrighted works from generative models. Furthermore, this survey will discuss resources and tools for users to evaluate copyright violations. Finally, insights into ongoing regulations and proposals for AI will be explored and compared. Through combining these disciplines, the implications of AI-driven content and copyright are thoroughly illustrated and brought into question.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable success across various domains. However, despite their promising performance in numerous real-world applications, most of these algorithms lack fairness considerations. Consequently, they may lead to discriminatory outcomes against certain communities, particularly marginalized populations, prompting extensive study in fair LLMs. On the other hand, fairness in LLMs, in contrast to fairness in traditional machine learning, entails exclusive backgrounds, taxonomies, and fulfillment techniques. To this end, this survey presents a comprehensive overview of recent advances in the existing literature concerning fair LLMs. Specifically, a brief introduction to LLMs is provided, followed by an analysis of factors contributing to bias in LLMs. Additionally, the concept of fairness in LLMs is discussed categorically, summarizing metrics for evaluating bias in LLMs and existing algorithms for promoting fairness. Furthermore, resources for evaluating bias in LLMs, including toolkits and datasets, are summarized. Finally, existing research challenges and open questions are discussed.

Algorithmic fairness, the research field of making machine learning (ML) algorithms fair, is an established area in ML. As ML technologies expand their application domains, including ones with high societal impact, it becomes essential to take fairness into consideration during the building of ML systems. Yet, despite its wide range of socially sensitive applications, most work treats the issue of algorithmic bias as an intrinsic property of supervised learning, i.e., the class label is given as a precondition. Unlike prior studies in fairness, we propose an individual fairness measure and a corresponding algorithm that deal with the challenges of uncertainty arising from censorship in class labels, while enforcing similar individuals to be treated similarly from a ranking perspective, free of the Lipschitz condition in the conventional individual fairness definition. We argue that this perspective represents a more realistic model of fairness research for real-world application deployment and show how learning with such a relaxed precondition draws new insights that better explains algorithmic fairness. We conducted experiments on four real-world datasets to evaluate our proposed method compared to other fairness models, demonstrating its superiority in minimizing discrimination while maintaining predictive performance with uncertainty present.

Bias in machine learning has rightly received significant attention over the last decade. However, most fair machine learning (fair-ML) work to address bias in decision-making systems has focused solely on the offline setting. Despite the wide prevalence of online systems in the real world, work on identifying and correcting bias in the online setting is severely lacking. The unique challenges of the online environment make addressing bias more difficult than in the offline setting. First, Streaming Machine Learning (SML) algorithms must deal with the constantly evolving real-time data stream. Second, they need to adapt to changing data distributions (concept drift) to make accurate predictions on new incoming data. Adding fairness constraints to this already complicated task is not straightforward. In this work, we focus on the challenges of achieving fairness in biased data streams while accounting for the presence of concept drift, accessing one sample at a time. We present Fair Sampling over Stream ($FS^2$), a novel fair rebalancing approach capable of being integrated with SML classification algorithms. Furthermore, we devise the first unified performance-fairness metric, Fairness Bonded Utility (FBU), to evaluate and compare the trade-off between performance and fairness of different bias mitigation methods efficiently. FBU simplifies the comparison of fairness-performance trade-offs of multiple techniques through one unified and intuitive evaluation, allowing model designers to easily choose a technique. Overall, extensive evaluations show our measures surpass those of other fair online techniques previously reported in the literature.