John P. Dickerson

Vedant Nanda, Till Speicher, Camila Kolling et al. · cambridge

A major challenge in studying robustness in deep learning is defining the set of ``meaningless'' perturbations to which a given Neural Network (NN) should be invariant. Most work on robustness implicitly uses a human as the reference model to define such perturbations. Our work offers a new view on robustness by using another reference NN to define the set of perturbations a given NN should be invariant to, thus generalizing the reliance on a reference ``human NN'' to any NN. This makes measuring robustness equivalent to measuring the extent to which two NNs share invariances, for which we propose a measure called STIR. STIR re-purposes existing representation similarity measures to make them suitable for measuring shared invariances. Using our measure, we are able to gain insights into how shared invariances vary with changes in weight initialization, architecture, loss functions, and training dataset. Our implementation is available at: \url{https://github.com/nvedant07/STIR}.

Samuel Dooley, Rhea Sanjay Sukthanker, John P. Dickerson et al.

Face recognition systems are widely deployed in safety-critical applications, including law enforcement, yet they exhibit bias across a range of socio-demographic dimensions, such as gender and race. Conventional wisdom dictates that model biases arise from biased training data. As a consequence, previous works on bias mitigation largely focused on pre-processing the training data, adding penalties to prevent bias from effecting the model during training, or post-processing predictions to debias them, yet these approaches have shown limited success on hard problems such as face recognition. In our work, we discover that biases are actually inherent to neural network architectures themselves. Following this reframing, we conduct the first neural architecture search for fairness, jointly with a search for hyperparameters. Our search outputs a suite of models which Pareto-dominate all other high-performance architectures and existing bias mitigation methods in terms of accuracy and fairness, often by large margins, on the two most widely used datasets for face identification, CelebA and VGGFace2. Furthermore, these models generalize to other datasets and sensitive attributes. We release our code, models and raw data files at https://github.com/dooleys/FR-NAS.

Sahil Verma, Chirag Shah, John P. Dickerson et al. · uw

Recommender systems influence many of our interactions in the digital world -- impacting how we shop for clothes, sorting what we see when browsing YouTube or TikTok, and determining which restaurants and hotels we are shown when using hospitality platforms. Modern recommender systems are large, opaque models trained on a mixture of proprietary and open-source datasets. Naturally, issues of trust arise on both the developer and user side: is the system working correctly, and why did a user receive (or not receive) a particular recommendation? Providing an explanation alongside a recommendation alleviates some of these concerns. The status quo for auxiliary recommender system feedback is either user-specific explanations (e.g., "users who bought item B also bought item A") or item-specific explanations (e.g., "we are recommending item A because you watched/bought item B"). However, users bring personalized context into their search experience, valuing an item as a function of that item's attributes and their own personal preferences. In this work, we propose RecXplainer, a novel method for generating fine-grained explanations based on a user's preferences over the attributes of recommended items. We evaluate RecXplainer on five real-world and large-scale recommendation datasets using five different kinds of recommender systems to demonstrate the efficacy of RecXplainer in capturing users' preferences over item attributes and using them to explain recommendations. We also compare RecXplainer to five baselines and show RecXplainer's exceptional performance on ten metrics.

Samuel Dooley, George Z. Wei, Tom Goldstein et al. · cmu

Facial analysis systems have been deployed by large companies and critiqued by scholars and activists for the past decade. Many existing algorithmic audits examine the performance of these systems on later stage elements of facial analysis systems like facial recognition and age, emotion, or perceived gender prediction; however, a core component to these systems has been vastly understudied from a fairness perspective: face detection, sometimes called face localization. Since face detection is a pre-requisite step in facial analysis systems, the bias we observe in face detection will flow downstream to the other components like facial recognition and emotion prediction. Additionally, no prior work has focused on the robustness of these systems under various perturbations and corruptions, which leaves open the question of how various people are impacted by these phenomena. We present the first of its kind detailed benchmark of face detection systems, specifically examining the robustness to noise of commercial and academic models. We use both standard and recently released academic facial datasets to quantitatively analyze trends in face detection robustness. Across all the datasets and systems, we generally find that photos of individuals who are $\textit{masculine presenting}$, $\textit{older}$, of $\textit{darker skin type}$, or have $\textit{dim lighting}$ are more susceptible to errors than their counterparts in other identities.

Duncan McElfresh, Sujay Khandagale, Jonathan Valverde et al.

While other areas of machine learning have seen more and more automation, designing a high-performing recommender system still requires a high level of human effort. Furthermore, recent work has shown that modern recommender system algorithms do not always improve over well-tuned baselines. A natural follow-up question is, "how do we choose the right algorithm for a new dataset and performance metric?" In this work, we start by giving the first large-scale study of recommender system approaches by comparing 18 algorithms and 100 sets of hyperparameters across 85 datasets and 315 metrics. We find that the best algorithms and hyperparameters are highly dependent on the dataset and performance metric, however, there are also strong correlations between the performance of each algorithm and various meta-features of the datasets. Motivated by these findings, we create RecZilla, a meta-learning approach to recommender systems that uses a model to predict the best algorithm and hyperparameters for new, unseen datasets. By using far more meta-training data than prior work, RecZilla is able to substantially reduce the level of human involvement when faced with a new recommender system application. We not only release our code and pretrained RecZilla models, but also all of our raw experimental results, so that practitioners can train a RecZilla model for their desired performance metric: https://github.com/naszilla/reczilla.

Sahil Verma, Ashudeep Singh, Varich Boonsanong et al. · microsoft-research, uw

Recommender systems play an essential role in the choices people make in domains such as entertainment, shopping, food, news, employment, and education. The machine learning models underlying these recommender systems are often enormously large and black-box in nature for users, content providers, and system developers alike. It is often crucial for all stakeholders to understand the model's rationale behind making certain predictions and recommendations. This is especially true for the content providers whose livelihoods depend on the recommender system. Drawing motivation from the practitioners' need, in this work, we propose a recourse framework for recommender systems, targeted towards the content providers. Algorithmic recourse in the recommendation setting is a set of actions that, if executed, would modify the recommendations (or ranking) of an item in the desired manner. A recourse suggests actions of the form: "if a feature changes X to Y, then the ranking of that item for a set of users will change to Z." Furthermore, we demonstrate that RecRec is highly effective in generating valid, sparse, and actionable recourses through an empirical evaluation of recommender systems trained on three real-world datasets. To the best of our knowledge, this work is the first to conceptualize and empirically test a generalized framework for generating recourses for recommender systems.

Benjamin Feuer, Micah Goldblum, Teresa Datta et al.

The release of ChatGPT in November 2022 sparked an explosion of interest in post-training and an avalanche of new preference optimization (PO) methods. These methods claim superior alignment by virtue of better correspondence with human pairwise preferences, often measured by LLM-judges. In this work, we attempt to answer the following question -- do LLM-judge preferences translate to progress on other, more concrete metrics for alignment, and if not, why not? We define a concrete metric for alignment, and introduce SOS-Bench (Substance Outweighs Style Benchmark), which is to the best of our knowledge the largest standardized, reproducible LLM meta-benchmark to date. We find that (1) LLM-judge preferences do not correlate with concrete measures of safety, world knowledge, and instruction following; (2) LLM-judges have powerful implicit biases, prioritizing style over factuality and safety; and (3) the supervised fine-tuning (SFT) stage of post-training, and not the PO stage, has the greatest impact on alignment, with data scaling and prompt diversity as the driving factors. Our codebase and complete results can be found at https://github.com/penfever/sos-bench.

I. Elizabeth Kumar, Keegan E. Hines, John P. Dickerson

Credit is an essential component of financial wellbeing in America, and unequal access to it is a large factor in the economic disparities between demographic groups that exist today. Today, machine learning algorithms, sometimes trained on alternative data, are increasingly being used to determine access to credit, yet research has shown that machine learning can encode many different versions of "unfairness," thus raising the concern that banks and other financial institutions could -- potentially unwittingly -- engage in illegal discrimination through the use of this technology. In the US, there are laws in place to make sure discrimination does not happen in lending and agencies charged with enforcing them. However, conversations around fair credit models in computer science and in policy are often misaligned: fair machine learning research often lacks legal and practical considerations specific to existing fair lending policy, and regulators have yet to issue new guidance on how, if at all, credit risk models should be utilizing practices and techniques from the research community. This paper aims to better align these sides of the conversation. We describe the current state of credit discrimination regulation in the United States, contextualize results from fair ML research to identify the specific fairness concerns raised by the use of machine learning in lending, and discuss regulatory opportunities to address these concerns.

Marina Knittel, Max Springer, John P. Dickerson et al.

Clustering is a fundamental building block of modern statistical analysis pipelines. Fair clustering has seen much attention from the machine learning community in recent years. We are some of the first to study fairness in the context of hierarchical clustering, after the results of Ahmadian et al. from NeurIPS in 2020. We evaluate our results using Dasgupta's cost function, perhaps one of the most prevalent theoretical metrics for hierarchical clustering evaluation. Our work vastly improves the previous $O(n^{5/6}poly\log(n))$ fair approximation for cost to a near polylogarithmic $O(n^δpoly\log(n))$ fair approximation for any constant $δ\in(0,1)$. This result establishes a cost-fairness tradeoff and extends to broader fairness constraints than the previous work. We also show how to alter existing hierarchical clusterings to guarantee fairness and cluster balance across any level in the hierarchy.

Teresa Datta, John P. Dickerson

Deployed artificial intelligence (AI) often impacts humans, and there is no one-size-fits-all metric to evaluate these tools. Human-centered evaluation of AI-based systems combines quantitative and qualitative analysis and human input. It has been explored to some depth in the explainable AI (XAI) and human-computer interaction (HCI) communities. Gaps remain, but the basic understanding that humans interact with AI and accompanying explanations, and that humans' needs -- complete with their cognitive biases and quirks -- should be held front and center, is accepted by the community. In this paper, we draw parallels between the relatively mature field of XAI and the rapidly evolving research boom around large language models (LLMs). Accepted evaluative metrics for LLMs are not human-centered. We argue that many of the same paths tread by the XAI community over the past decade will be retread when discussing LLMs. Specifically, we argue that humans' tendencies -- again, complete with their cognitive biases and quirks -- should rest front and center when evaluating deployed LLMs. We outline three developed focus areas of human-centered evaluation of XAI: mental models, use case utility, and cognitive engagement, and we highlight the importance of exploring each of these concepts for LLMs. Our goal is to jumpstart human-centered LLM evaluation.

Ryan Sullivan, J. K. Terry, Benjamin Black et al.

Visualizing optimization landscapes has led to many fundamental insights in numeric optimization, and novel improvements to optimization techniques. However, visualizations of the objective that reinforcement learning optimizes (the "reward surface") have only ever been generated for a small number of narrow contexts. This work presents reward surfaces and related visualizations of 27 of the most widely used reinforcement learning environments in Gym for the first time. We also explore reward surfaces in the policy gradient direction and show for the first time that many popular reinforcement learning environments have frequent "cliffs" (sudden large drops in expected return). We demonstrate that A2C often "dives off" these cliffs into low reward regions of the parameter space while PPO avoids them, confirming a popular intuition for PPO's improved performance over previous methods. We additionally introduce a highly extensible library that allows researchers to easily generate these visualizations in the future. Our findings provide new intuition to explain the successes and failures of modern RL methods, and our visualizations concretely characterize several failure modes of reinforcement learning agents in novel ways.

Christine Herlihy, John P. Dickerson

Restless multi-armed bandits are often used to model budget-constrained resource allocation tasks where receipt of the resource is associated with an increased probability of a favorable state transition. Prior work assumes that individual arms only benefit if they receive the resource directly. However, many allocation tasks occur within communities and can be characterized by positive externalities that allow arms to derive partial benefit when their neighbor(s) receive the resource. We thus introduce networked restless bandits, a novel multi-armed bandit setting in which arms are both restless and embedded within a directed graph. We then present Greta, a graph-aware, Whittle index-based heuristic algorithm that can be used to efficiently construct a constrained reward-maximizing action vector at each timestep. Our empirical results demonstrate that Greta outperforms comparison policies across a range of hyperparameter values and graph topologies.

Seyed A. Esmaeili, Sharmila Duppala, John P. Dickerson et al.

Numerous algorithms have been produced for the fundamental problem of clustering under many different notions of fairness. Perhaps the most common family of notions currently studied is group fairness, in which proportional group representation is ensured in every cluster. We extend this direction by considering the downstream application of clustering and how group fairness should be ensured for such a setting. Specifically, we consider a common setting in which a decision-maker runs a clustering algorithm, inspects the center of each cluster, and decides an appropriate outcome (label) for its corresponding cluster. In hiring for example, there could be two outcomes, positive (hire) or negative (reject), and each cluster would be assigned one of these two outcomes. To ensure group fairness in such a setting, we would desire proportional group representation in every label but not necessarily in every cluster as is done in group fair clustering. We provide algorithms for such problems and show that in contrast to their NP-hard counterparts in group fair clustering, they permit efficient solutions. We also consider a well-motivated alternative setting where the decision-maker is free to assign labels to the clusters regardless of the centers' positions in the metric space. We show that this setting exhibits interesting transitions from computationally hard to easy according to additional constraints on the problem. Moreover, when the constraint parameters take on natural values we show a randomized algorithm for this setting that always achieves an optimal clustering and satisfies the fairness constraints in expectation. Finally, we run experiments on real world datasets that validate the effectiveness of our algorithms.

Teresa Datta, Daniel Nissani, Max Cembalest et al.

Motivated by mitigating potentially harmful impacts of technologies, the AI community has formulated and accepted mathematical definitions for certain pillars of accountability: e.g. privacy, fairness, and model transparency. Yet, we argue this is fundamentally misguided because these definitions are imperfect, siloed constructions of the human values they hope to proxy, while giving the guise that those values are sufficiently embedded in our technologies. Under popularized methods, tensions arise when practitioners attempt to achieve each pillar of fairness, privacy, and transparency in isolation or simultaneously. In this position paper, we push for redirection. We argue that the AI community needs to consider all the consequences of choosing certain formulations of these pillars -- not just the technical incompatibilities, but also the effects within the context of deployment. We point towards sociotechnical research for frameworks for the latter, but push for broader efforts into implementing these in practice.

Vishnu Dutt Sharma, John P. Dickerson, Pratap Tokekar

Green Security Games with real-time information (GSG-I) add the real-time information about the agents' movement to the typical GSG formulation. Prior works on GSG-I have used deep reinforcement learning (DRL) to learn the best policy for the agent in such an environment without any need to store the huge number of state representations for GSG-I. However, the decision-making process of DRL methods is largely opaque, which results in a lack of trust in their predictions. To tackle this issue, we present an interpretable DRL method for GSG-I that generates visualization to explain the decisions taken by the DRL algorithm. We also show that this approach performs better and works well with a simpler training regimen compared to the existing method.

Ryan Sullivan, Akarsh Kumar, Shengyi Huang et al.

Most reinforcement learning methods rely heavily on dense, well-normalized environment rewards. DreamerV3 recently introduced a model-based method with a number of tricks that mitigate these limitations, achieving state-of-the-art on a wide range of benchmarks with a single set of hyperparameters. This result sparked discussion about the generality of the tricks, since they appear to be applicable to other reinforcement learning algorithms. Our work applies DreamerV3's tricks to PPO and is the first such empirical study outside of the original work. Surprisingly, we find that the tricks presented do not transfer as general improvements to PPO. We use a high quality PPO reference implementation and present extensive ablation studies totaling over 10,000 A100 hours on the Arcade Learning Environment and the DeepMind Control Suite. Though our experiments demonstrate that these tricks do not generally outperform PPO, we identify cases where they succeed and offer insight into the relationship between the implementation tricks. In particular, PPO with these tricks performs comparably to PPO on Atari games with reward clipping and significantly outperforms PPO without reward clipping.

Ryan Sullivan, Ryan Pégoud, Ameen Ur Rehman et al.

Curriculum learning has been a quiet, yet crucial component of many high-profile successes of reinforcement learning. Despite this, it is still a niche topic that is not directly supported by any of the major reinforcement learning libraries. These methods can improve the capabilities and generalization of RL agents, but often require complex changes to training code. We introduce Syllabus, a portable curriculum learning library, as a solution to this problem. Syllabus provides a universal API for curriculum learning, modular implementations of popular automatic curriculum learning methods, and infrastructure that allows them to be easily integrated with asynchronous training code in nearly any RL library. Syllabus provides a minimal API for core curriculum learning components, making it easier to design new algorithms and adapt existing ones to new environments. We demonstrate this by evaluating the algorithms in Syllabus on several new environments, each using agents written in a different RL library. We present the first examples of automatic curriculum learning in NetHack and Neural MMO, two of the most challenging RL benchmarks, and find evidence that existing methods do not directly transfer to complex new environments. Syllabus can be found at https://github.com/RyanNavillus/Syllabus.

Vedant Nanda, Till Speicher, John P. Dickerson et al.

Representations learned by pre-training a neural network on a large dataset are increasingly used successfully to perform a variety of downstream tasks. In this work, we take a closer look at how features are encoded in such pre-trained representations. We find that learned representations in a given layer exhibit a degree of diffuse redundancy, ie, any randomly chosen subset of neurons in the layer that is larger than a threshold size shares a large degree of similarity with the full layer and is able to perform similarly as the whole layer on a variety of downstream tasks. For example, a linear probe trained on $20\%$ of randomly picked neurons from the penultimate layer of a ResNet50 pre-trained on ImageNet1k achieves an accuracy within $5\%$ of a linear probe trained on the full layer of neurons for downstream CIFAR10 classification. We conduct experiments on different neural architectures (including CNNs and Transformers) pre-trained on both ImageNet1k and ImageNet21k and evaluate a variety of downstream tasks taken from the VTAB benchmark. We find that the loss and dataset used during pre-training largely govern the degree of diffuse redundancy and the "critical mass" of neurons needed often depends on the downstream task, suggesting that there is a task-inherent redundancy-performance Pareto frontier. Our findings shed light on the nature of representations learned by pre-trained deep neural networks and suggest that entire layers might not be necessary to perform many downstream tasks. We investigate the potential for exploiting this redundancy to achieve efficient generalization for downstream tasks and also draw caution to certain possible unintended consequences. Our code is available at \url{https://github.com/nvedant07/diffused-redundancy}.

Vedant Nanda, Ayan Majumdar, Camila Kolling et al.

An evaluation criterion for safe and trustworthy deep learning is how well the invariances captured by representations of deep neural networks (DNNs) are shared with humans. We identify challenges in measuring these invariances. Prior works used gradient-based methods to generate identically represented inputs (IRIs), ie, inputs which have identical representations (on a given layer) of a neural network, and thus capture invariances of a given network. One necessary criterion for a network's invariances to align with human perception is for its IRIs look 'similar' to humans. Prior works, however, have mixed takeaways; some argue that later layers of DNNs do not learn human-like invariances (\cite{jenelle2019metamers}) yet others seem to indicate otherwise (\cite{mahendran2014understanding}). We argue that the loss function used to generate IRIs can heavily affect takeaways about invariances of the network and is the primary reason for these conflicting findings. We propose an adversarial regularizer on the IRI generation loss that finds IRIs that make any model appear to have very little shared invariance with humans. Based on this evidence, we argue that there is scope for improving models to have human-like invariances, and further, to have meaningful comparisons between models one should use IRIs generated using the regularizer-free loss. We then conduct an in-depth investigation of how different components (eg architectures, training losses, data augmentations) of the deep learning pipeline contribute to learning models that have good alignment with humans. We find that architectures with residual connections trained using a (self-supervised) contrastive loss with $\ell_p$ ball adversarial data augmentation tend to learn invariances that are most aligned with humans. Code: \url{github.com/nvedant07/Human-NN-Alignment}.

Neehar Peri, Michael J. Curry, Samuel Dooley et al.

The design of optimal auctions is a problem of interest in economics, game theory and computer science. Despite decades of effort, strategyproof, revenue-maximizing auction designs are still not known outside of restricted settings. However, recent methods using deep learning have shown some success in approximating optimal auctions, recovering several known solutions and outperforming strong baselines when optimal auctions are not known. In addition to maximizing revenue, auction mechanisms may also seek to encourage socially desirable constraints such as allocation fairness or diversity. However, these philosophical notions neither have standardization nor do they have widely accepted formal definitions. In this paper, we propose PreferenceNet, an extension of existing neural-network-based auction mechanisms to encode constraints using (potentially human-provided) exemplars of desirable allocations. In addition, we introduce a new metric to evaluate an auction allocations' adherence to such socially desirable constraints and demonstrate that our proposed method is competitive with current state-of-the-art neural-network based auction designs. We validate our approach through human subject research and show that we are able to effectively capture real human preferences. Our code is available at https://github.com/neeharperi/PreferenceNet

Stephanie Allen, John P. Dickerson, Steven A. Gabriel

As demonstrated by Ratliff et al. (2014), inverse optimization can be used to recover the objective function parameters of players in multi-player Nash games. These games involve the optimization problems of multiple players in which the players can affect each other in their objective functions. In generalized Nash equilibrium problems (GNEPs), a player's set of feasible actions is also impacted by the actions taken by other players in the game; see Facchinei and Kanzow (2010) for more background on this problem. One example of such impact comes in the form of joint/"coupled" constraints as referenced by Rosen (1965), Harker (1991), and Facchinei et al. (2007) which involve other players' variables in the constraints of the feasible region. We extend the framework of Ratliff et al. (2014) to find inverse optimization solutions for the class of GNEPs with joint constraints. The resulting formulation is then applied to a simulated multi-player transportation problem on a road network. Also, we provide some theoretical results related to this transportation problem regarding runtime of the extended framework as well as uniqueness and non-uniqueness of solutions to our simulation experiments. We see that our model recovers parameterizations that produce the same flow patterns as the original parameterizations and that this holds true across multiple networks, different assumptions regarding players' perceived costs, and the majority of restrictive capacity settings and the associated numbers of players. Code for the project can be found at: https://github.com/sallen7/IO_GNEP.

Vedant Nanda, Samuel Dooley, Sahil Singla et al.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) are increasingly used in real-world applications (e.g. facial recognition). This has resulted in concerns about the fairness of decisions made by these models. Various notions and measures of fairness have been proposed to ensure that a decision-making system does not disproportionately harm (or benefit) particular subgroups of the population. In this paper, we argue that traditional notions of fairness that are only based on models' outputs are not sufficient when the model is vulnerable to adversarial attacks. We argue that in some cases, it may be easier for an attacker to target a particular subgroup, resulting in a form of \textit{robustness bias}. We show that measuring robustness bias is a challenging task for DNNs and propose two methods to measure this form of bias. We then conduct an empirical study on state-of-the-art neural networks on commonly used real-world datasets such as CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, Adience, and UTKFace and show that in almost all cases there are subgroups (in some cases based on sensitive attributes like race, gender, etc) which are less robust and are thus at a disadvantage. We argue that this kind of bias arises due to both the data distribution and the highly complex nature of the learned decision boundary in the case of DNNs, thus making mitigation of such biases a non-trivial task. Our results show that robustness bias is an important criterion to consider while auditing real-world systems that rely on DNNs for decision making. Code to reproduce all our results can be found here: \url{https://github.com/nvedant07/Fairness-Through-Robustness}

Neehar Peri, Neal Gupta, W. Ronny Huang et al.

Targeted clean-label data poisoning is a type of adversarial attack on machine learning systems in which an adversary injects a few correctly-labeled, minimally-perturbed samples into the training data, causing a model to misclassify a particular test sample during inference. Although defenses have been proposed for general poisoning attacks, no reliable defense for clean-label attacks has been demonstrated, despite the attacks' effectiveness and realistic applications. In this work, we propose a simple, yet highly-effective Deep k-NN defense against both feature collision and convex polytope clean-label attacks on the CIFAR-10 dataset. We demonstrate that our proposed strategy is able to detect over 99% of poisoned examples in both attacks and remove them without compromising model performance. Additionally, through ablation studies, we discover simple guidelines for selecting the value of k as well as for implementing the Deep k-NN defense on real-world datasets with class imbalance. Our proposed defense shows that current clean-label poisoning attack strategies can be annulled, and serves as a strong yet simple-to-implement baseline defense to test future clean-label poisoning attacks. Our code is available at https://github.com/neeharperi/DeepKNNDefense

John P. Dickerson, Hadi Hosseini, Samarth Khanna et al.

The rapid integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) in high-stakes decision-making -- such as allocating scarce resources like donor organs -- raises critical questions about their alignment with human moral values. We systematically evaluate the behavior of several prominent LLMs against human preferences in kidney allocation scenarios and show that LLMs: i) exhibit stark deviations from human values in prioritizing various attributes, and ii) in contrast to humans, LLMs rarely express indecision, opting for deterministic decisions even when alternative indecision mechanisms (e.g., coin flipping) are provided. Nonetheless, we show that low-rank supervised fine-tuning with few samples is often effective in improving both decision consistency and calibrating indecision modeling. These findings illustrate the necessity of explicit alignment strategies for LLMs in moral/ethical domains.

Sharmila Duppala, Juan Luque, John P. Dickerson et al.

We study the canonical fair clustering problem where each cluster is constrained to have close to population-level representation of each group. Despite significant attention, the salient issue of having incomplete knowledge about the group membership of each point has been superficially addressed. In this paper, we consider a setting where the assigned group memberships are noisy. We introduce a simple noise model that requires a small number of parameters to be given by the decision maker. We then present an algorithm for fair clustering with provable \emph{robustness} guarantees. Our framework enables the decision maker to trade off between the robustness and the clustering quality. Unlike previous work, our algorithms are backed by worst-case theoretical guarantees. Finally, we empirically verify the performance of our algorithm on real world datasets and show its superior performance over existing baselines.

Marina Knittel, Samuel Dooley, John P. Dickerson

While the stable marriage problem and its variants model a vast range of matching markets, they fail to capture complex agent relationships, such as the affiliation of applicants and employers in an interview marketplace. To model this problem, the existing literature on matching with externalities permits agents to provide complete and total rankings over matchings based off of both their own and their affiliates' matches. This complete ordering restriction is unrealistic, and further the model may have an empty core. To address this, we introduce the Dichotomous Affiliate Stable Matching (DASM) Problem, where agents' preferences indicate dichotomous acceptance or rejection of another agent in the marketplace, both for themselves and their affiliates. We also assume the agent's preferences over entire matchings are determined by a general weighted valuation function of their (and their affiliates') matches. Our results are threefold: (1) we use a human study to show that real-world matching rankings follow our assumed valuation function; (2) we prove that there always exists a stable solution by providing an efficient, easily-implementable algorithm that finds such a solution; and (3) we experimentally validate the efficiency of our algorithm versus a linear-programming-based approach.

Samuel Dooley, George Z. Wei, Tom Goldstein et al.

As facial recognition systems are deployed more widely, scholars and activists have studied their biases and harms. Audits are commonly used to accomplish this and compare the algorithmic facial recognition systems' performance against datasets with various metadata labels about the subjects of the images. Seminal works have found discrepancies in performance by gender expression, age, perceived race, skin type, etc. These studies and audits often examine algorithms which fall into two categories: academic models or commercial models. We present a detailed comparison between academic and commercial face detection systems, specifically examining robustness to noise. We find that state-of-the-art academic face detection models exhibit demographic disparities in their noise robustness, specifically by having statistically significant decreased performance on older individuals and those who present their gender in a masculine manner. When we compare the size of these disparities to that of commercial models, we conclude that commercial models - in contrast to their relatively larger development budget and industry-level fairness commitments - are always as biased or more biased than an academic model.

Seyed A. Esmaeili, Sharmila Duppala, Davidson Cheng et al.

Online bipartite-matching platforms are ubiquitous and find applications in important areas such as crowdsourcing and ridesharing. In the most general form, the platform consists of three entities: two sides to be matched and a platform operator that decides the matching. The design of algorithms for such platforms has traditionally focused on the operator's (expected) profit. Since fairness has become an important consideration that was ignored in the existing algorithms a collection of online matching algorithms have been developed that give a fair treatment guarantee for one side of the market at the expense of a drop in the operator's profit. In this paper, we generalize the existing work to offer fair treatment guarantees to both sides of the market simultaneously, at a calculated worst case drop to operator profit. We consider group and individual Rawlsian fairness criteria. Moreover, our algorithms have theoretical guarantees and have adjustable parameters that can be tuned as desired to balance the trade-off between the utilities of the three sides. We also derive hardness results that give clear upper bounds over the performance of any algorithm.

Hannah K. Bako, Alisha Varma, Anuoluwapo Faboro et al.

Templates have emerged as an effective approach to simplifying the visualization design and programming process. For example, they enable users to quickly generate multiple visualization designs even when using complex toolkits like D3. However, these templates are often treated as rigid artifacts that respond poorly to changes made outside of the template's established parameters, limiting user creativity. Preserving the user's creative flow requires a more dynamic approach to template-based visualization design, where tools can respond gracefully to users' edits when they modify templates in unexpected ways. In this paper, we leverage the structural similarities revealed by templates to design resilient support features for prototyping D3 visualizations: recommendations to suggest complementary interactions for a user's D3 program; and code augmentation to implement recommended interactions with a single click, even when users deviate from pre-defined templates. We demonstrate the utility of these features in Mirny, a d design-focused prototyping environment for D3. In a user study with 20 D3 users, we find that these automated features enable participants to prototype their design ideas with significantly fewer programming iterations. We also characterize key modification strategies used by participants to customize D3 templates. Informed by our findings and participants' feedback, we discuss the key implications of the use of templates for interleaving visualization programming and design.

Samuel Dooley, Tom Goldstein, John P. Dickerson

Facial detection and analysis systems have been deployed by large companies and critiqued by scholars and activists for the past decade. Critiques that focus on system performance analyze disparity of the system's output, i.e., how frequently is a face detected for different Fitzpatrick skin types or perceived genders. However, we focus on the robustness of these system outputs under noisy natural perturbations. We present the first of its kind detailed benchmark of the robustness of three such systems: Amazon Rekognition, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud Platform. We use both standard and recently released academic facial datasets to quantitatively analyze trends in robustness for each. Across all the datasets and systems, we generally find that photos of individuals who are older, masculine presenting, of darker skin type, or have dim lighting are more susceptible to errors than their counterparts in other identities.

Sahil Verma, Aditya Lahiri, John P. Dickerson et al.

As machine learning (ML) systems take a more prominent and central role in contributing to life-impacting decisions, ensuring their trustworthiness and accountability is of utmost importance. Explanations sit at the core of these desirable attributes of a ML system. The emerging field is frequently called ``Explainable AI (XAI)'' or ``Explainable ML.'' The goal of explainable ML is to intuitively explain the predictions of a ML system, while adhering to the needs to various stakeholders. Many explanation techniques were developed with contributions from both academia and industry. However, there are several existing challenges that have not garnered enough interest and serve as roadblocks to widespread adoption of explainable ML. In this short paper, we enumerate challenges in explainable ML from an industry perspective. We hope these challenges will serve as promising future research directions, and would contribute to democratizing explainable ML.

Christine Herlihy, Aviva Prins, Aravind Srinivasan et al.

Restless and collapsing bandits are often used to model budget-constrained resource allocation in settings where arms have action-dependent transition probabilities, such as the allocation of health interventions among patients. However, state-of-the-art Whittle-index-based approaches to this planning problem either do not consider fairness among arms, or incentivize fairness without guaranteeing it. We thus introduce ProbFair, a probabilistically fair policy that maximizes total expected reward and satisfies the budget constraint while ensuring a strictly positive lower bound on the probability of being pulled at each timestep. We evaluate our algorithm on a real-world application, where interventions support continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy adherence among patients, as well as on a broader class of synthetic transition matrices. We find that ProbFair preserves utility while providing fairness guarantees.

Seyed A. Esmaeili, Brian Brubach, Aravind Srinivasan et al.

Clustering is a fundamental unsupervised learning problem where a dataset is partitioned into clusters that consist of nearby points in a metric space. A recent variant, fair clustering, associates a color with each point representing its group membership and requires that each color has (approximately) equal representation in each cluster to satisfy group fairness. In this model, the cost of the clustering objective increases due to enforcing fairness in the algorithm. The relative increase in the cost, the ''price of fairness,'' can indeed be unbounded. Therefore, in this paper we propose to treat an upper bound on the clustering objective as a constraint on the clustering problem, and to maximize equality of representation subject to it. We consider two fairness objectives: the group utilitarian objective and the group egalitarian objective, as well as the group leximin objective which generalizes the group egalitarian objective. We derive fundamental lower bounds on the approximation of the utilitarian and egalitarian objectives and introduce algorithms with provable guarantees for them. For the leximin objective we introduce an effective heuristic algorithm. We further derive impossibility results for other natural fairness objectives. We conclude with experimental results on real-world datasets that demonstrate the validity of our algorithms.

Darshan Chakrabarti, John P. Dickerson, Seyed A. Esmaeili et al.

Clustering is a fundamental problem in unsupervised machine learning, and fair variants of it have recently received significant attention due to its societal implications. In this work we introduce a novel definition of individual fairness for clustering problems. Specifically, in our model, each point $j$ has a set of other points $\mathcal{S}_j$ that it perceives as similar to itself, and it feels that it is fairly treated if the quality of service it receives in the solution is $α$-close (in a multiplicative sense, for a given $α\geq 1$) to that of the points in $\mathcal{S}_j$. We begin our study by answering questions regarding the structure of the problem, namely for what values of $α$ the problem is well-defined, and what the behavior of the \emph{Price of Fairness (PoF)} for it is. For the well-defined region of $α$, we provide efficient and easily-implementable approximation algorithms for the $k$-center objective, which in certain cases enjoy bounded-PoF guarantees. We finally complement our analysis by an extensive suite of experiments that validates the effectiveness of our theoretical results.

Sahil Verma, Keegan Hines, John P. Dickerson

Explainable machine learning (ML) has gained traction in recent years due to the increasing adoption of ML-based systems in many sectors. Algorithmic Recourses (ARs) provide "what if" feedback of the form "if an input datapoint were x' instead of x, then an ML-based system's output would be y' instead of y." ARs are attractive due to their actionable feedback, amenability to existing legal frameworks, and fidelity to the underlying ML model. Yet, current AR approaches are single shot -- that is, they assume x can change to x' in a single time period. We propose a novel stochastic-control-based approach that generates sequential ARs, that is, ARs that allow x to move stochastically and sequentially across intermediate states to a final state x'. Our approach is model agnostic and black box. Furthermore, the calculation of ARs is amortized such that once trained, it applies to multiple datapoints without the need for re-optimization. In addition to these primary characteristics, our approach admits optional desiderata such as adherence to the data manifold, respect for causal relations, and sparsity -- identified by past research as desirable properties of ARs. We evaluate our approach using three real-world datasets and show successful generation of sequential ARs that respect other recourse desiderata.

Brian Brubach, Darshan Chakrabarti, John P. Dickerson et al.

Metric clustering is fundamental in areas ranging from Combinatorial Optimization and Data Mining, to Machine Learning and Operations Research. However, in a variety of situations we may have additional requirements or knowledge, distinct from the underlying metric, regarding which pairs of points should be clustered together. To capture and analyze such scenarios, we introduce a novel family of \emph{stochastic pairwise constraints}, which we incorporate into several essential clustering objectives (radius/median/means). Moreover, we demonstrate that these constraints can succinctly model an intriguing collection of applications, including among others \emph{Individual Fairness} in clustering and \emph{Must-link} constraints in semi-supervised learning. Our main result consists of a general framework that yields approximation algorithms with provable guarantees for important clustering objectives, while at the same time producing solutions that respect the stochastic pairwise constraints. Furthermore, for certain objectives we devise improved results in the case of Must-link constraints, which are also the best possible from a theoretical perspective. Finally, we present experimental evidence that validates the effectiveness of our algorithms.

Valeriia Cherepanova, Vedant Nanda, Micah Goldblum et al.

As machine learning algorithms have been widely deployed across applications, many concerns have been raised over the fairness of their predictions, especially in high stakes settings (such as facial recognition and medical imaging). To respond to these concerns, the community has proposed and formalized various notions of fairness as well as methods for rectifying unfair behavior. While fairness constraints have been studied extensively for classical models, the effectiveness of methods for imposing fairness on deep neural networks is unclear. In this paper, we observe that these large models overfit to fairness objectives, and produce a range of unintended and undesirable consequences. We conduct our experiments on both facial recognition and automated medical diagnosis datasets using state-of-the-art architectures.

Jingling Li, Mozhi Zhang, Keyulu Xu et al.

Noisy labels are inevitable in large real-world datasets. In this work, we explore an area understudied by previous works -- how the network's architecture impacts its robustness to noisy labels. We provide a formal framework connecting the robustness of a network to the alignments between its architecture and target/noise functions. Our framework measures a network's robustness via the predictive power in its representations -- the test performance of a linear model trained on the learned representations using a small set of clean labels. We hypothesize that a network is more robust to noisy labels if its architecture is more aligned with the target function than the noise. To support our hypothesis, we provide both theoretical and empirical evidence across various neural network architectures and different domains. We also find that when the network is well-aligned with the target function, its predictive power in representations could improve upon state-of-the-art (SOTA) noisy-label-training methods in terms of test accuracy and even outperform sophisticated methods that use clean labels.

Sahil Verma, Varich Boonsanong, Minh Hoang et al.

Machine learning plays a role in many deployed decision systems, often in ways that are difficult or impossible to understand by human stakeholders. Explaining, in a human-understandable way, the relationship between the input and output of machine learning models is essential to the development of trustworthy machine learning based systems. A burgeoning body of research seeks to define the goals and methods of explainability in machine learning. In this paper, we seek to review and categorize research on counterfactual explanations, a specific class of explanation that provides a link between what could have happened had input to a model been changed in a particular way. Modern approaches to counterfactual explainability in machine learning draw connections to the established legal doctrine in many countries, making them appealing to fielded systems in high-impact areas such as finance and healthcare. Thus, we design a rubric with desirable properties of counterfactual explanation algorithms and comprehensively evaluate all currently proposed algorithms against that rubric. Our rubric provides easy comparison and comprehension of the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches and serves as an introduction to major research themes in this field. We also identify gaps and discuss promising research directions in the space of counterfactual explainability.

Kevin Kuo, Anthony Ostuni, Elizabeth Horishny et al.

The design of revenue-maximizing auctions with strong incentive guarantees is a core concern of economic theory. Computational auctions enable online advertising, sourcing, spectrum allocation, and myriad financial markets. Analytic progress in this space is notoriously difficult; since Myerson's 1981 work characterizing single-item optimal auctions, there has been limited progress outside of restricted settings. A recent paper by Dütting et al. circumvents analytic difficulties by applying deep learning techniques to, instead, approximate optimal auctions. In parallel, new research from Ilvento et al. and other groups has developed notions of fairness in the context of auction design. Inspired by these advances, in this paper, we extend techniques for approximating auctions using deep learning to address concerns of fairness while maintaining high revenue and strong incentive guarantees.

Samuel Dooley, John P. Dickerson

In many labor markets, workers and firms are connected via affiliative relationships. A management consulting firm wishes to both accept the best new workers but also place its current affiliated workers at strong firms. Similarly, a research university wishes to hire strong job market candidates while also placing its own candidates at strong peer universities. We model this affiliate matching problem in a generalization of the classic stable marriage setting by permitting firms to state preferences over not just which workers to whom they are matched, but also to which firms their affiliated workers are matched. Based on results from a human survey, we find that participants (acting as firms) give preference to their own affiliate workers in surprising ways that violate some assumptions of the classical stable marriage problem. This motivates a nuanced discussion of how stability could be defined in affiliate matching problems; we give an example of a marketplace which admits a stable match under one natural definition of stability, and does not for that same marketplace under a different, but still natural, definition. We conclude by setting a research agenda toward the creation of a centralized clearing mechanism in this general setting.

Brian Brubach, Darshan Chakrabarti, John P. Dickerson et al.

Clustering is a foundational problem in machine learning with numerous applications. As machine learning increases in ubiquity as a backend for automated systems, concerns about fairness arise. Much of the current literature on fairness deals with discrimination against protected classes in supervised learning (group fairness). We define a different notion of fair clustering wherein the probability that two points (or a community of points) become separated is bounded by an increasing function of their pairwise distance (or community diameter). We capture the situation where data points represent people who gain some benefit from being clustered together. Unfairness arises when certain points are deterministically separated, either arbitrarily or by someone who intends to harm them as in the case of gerrymandering election districts. In response, we formally define two new types of fairness in the clustering setting, pairwise fairness and community preservation. To explore the practicality of our fairness goals, we devise an approach for extending existing $k$-center algorithms to satisfy these fairness constraints. Analysis of this approach proves that reasonable approximations can be achieved while maintaining fairness. In experiments, we compare the effectiveness of our approach to classical $k$-center algorithms/heuristics and explore the tradeoff between optimal clustering and fairness.

Vedant Nanda, Till Speicher, John P. Dickerson et al.

As deep neural networks (DNNs) get adopted in an ever-increasing number of applications, explainability has emerged as a crucial desideratum for these models. In many real-world tasks, one of the principal reasons for requiring explainability is to in turn assess prediction robustness, where predictions (i.e., class labels) that do not conform to their respective explanations (e.g., presence or absence of a concept in the input) are deemed to be unreliable. However, most, if not all, prior methods for checking explanation-conformity (e.g., LIME, TCAV, saliency maps) require significant manual intervention, which hinders their large-scale deployability. In this paper, we propose a robustness-assessment framework, at the core of which is the idea of using machine-checkable concepts. Our framework defines a large number of concepts that the DNN explanations could be based on and performs the explanation-conformity check at test time to assess prediction robustness. Both steps are executed in an automated manner without requiring any human intervention and are easily scaled to datasets with a very large number of classes. Experiments on real-world datasets and human surveys show that our framework is able to enhance prediction robustness significantly: the predictions marked to be robust by our framework have significantly higher accuracy and are more robust to adversarial perturbations.

Seyed A. Esmaeili, Brian Brubach, Leonidas Tsepenekas et al.

In clustering problems, a central decision-maker is given a complete metric graph over vertices and must provide a clustering of vertices that minimizes some objective function. In fair clustering problems, vertices are endowed with a color (e.g., membership in a group), and the features of a valid clustering might also include the representation of colors in that clustering. Prior work in fair clustering assumes complete knowledge of group membership. In this paper, we generalize prior work by assuming imperfect knowledge of group membership through probabilistic assignments. We present clustering algorithms in this more general setting with approximation ratio guarantees. We also address the problem of "metric membership", where different groups have a notion of order and distance. Experiments are conducted using our proposed algorithms as well as baselines to validate our approach and also surface nuanced concerns when group membership is not known deterministically.

Rachel Freedman, Jana Schaich Borg, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong et al.

The efficient and fair allocation of limited resources is a classical problem in economics and computer science. In kidney exchanges, a central market maker allocates living kidney donors to patients in need of an organ. Patients and donors in kidney exchanges are prioritized using ad-hoc weights decided on by committee and then fed into an allocation algorithm that determines who gets what--and who does not. In this paper, we provide an end-to-end methodology for estimating weights of individual participant profiles in a kidney exchange. We first elicit from human subjects a list of patient attributes they consider acceptable for the purpose of prioritizing patients (e.g., medical characteristics, lifestyle choices, and so on). Then, we ask subjects comparison queries between patient profiles and estimate weights in a principled way from their responses. We show how to use these weights in kidney exchange market clearing algorithms. We then evaluate the impact of the weights in simulations and find that the precise numerical values of the weights we computed matter little, other than the ordering of profiles that they imply. However, compared to not prioritizing patients at all, there is a significant effect, with certain classes of patients being (de)prioritized based on the human-elicited value judgments.

Lok Chan, Kenzie Doyle, Duncan McElfresh et al.

Given AI's growing role in modeling and improving decision-making, how and when to present users with feedback is an urgent topic to address. We empirically examined the effect of feedback from false AI on moral decision-making about donor kidney allocation. We found some evidence that judgments about whether a patient should receive a kidney can be influenced by feedback about participants' own decision-making perceived to be given by AI, even if the feedback is entirely random. We also discovered different effects between assessments presented as being from human experts and assessments presented as being from AI.

Vedant Nanda, Pan Xu, Karthik Abinav Sankararaman et al.

Rideshare platforms, when assigning requests to drivers, tend to maximize profit for the system and/or minimize waiting time for riders. Such platforms can exacerbate biases that drivers may have over certain types of requests. We consider the case of peak hours when the demand for rides is more than the supply of drivers. Drivers are well aware of their advantage during the peak hours and can choose to be selective about which rides to accept. Moreover, if in such a scenario, the assignment of requests to drivers (by the platform) is made only to maximize profit and/or minimize wait time for riders, requests of a certain type (e.g. from a non-popular pickup location, or to a non-popular drop-off location) might never be assigned to a driver. Such a system can be highly unfair to riders. However, increasing fairness might come at a cost of the overall profit made by the rideshare platform. To balance these conflicting goals, we present a flexible, non-adaptive algorithm, \lpalg, that allows the platform designer to control the profit and fairness of the system via parameters $α$ and $β$ respectively. We model the matching problem as an online bipartite matching where the set of drivers is offline and requests arrive online. Upon the arrival of a request, we use \lpalg to assign it to a driver (the driver might then choose to accept or reject it) or reject the request. We formalize the measures of profit and fairness in our setting and show that by using \lpalg, the competitive ratios for profit and fairness measures would be no worse than $α/e$ and $β/e$ respectively. Extensive experimental results on both real-world and synthetic datasets confirm the validity of our theoretical lower bounds. Additionally, they show that $\lpalg$ under some choice of $(α, β)$ can beat two natural heuristics, Greedy and Uniform, on \emph{both} fairness and profit.

Debjani Saha, Candice Schumann, Duncan C. McElfresh et al.

Bias in machine learning has manifested injustice in several areas, such as medicine, hiring, and criminal justice. In response, computer scientists have developed myriad definitions of fairness to correct this bias in fielded algorithms. While some definitions are based on established legal and ethical norms, others are largely mathematical. It is unclear whether the general public agrees with these fairness definitions, and perhaps more importantly, whether they understand these definitions. We take initial steps toward bridging this gap between ML researchers and the public, by addressing the question: does a lay audience understand a basic definition of ML fairness? We develop a metric to measure comprehension of three such definitions--demographic parity, equal opportunity, and equalized odds. We evaluate this metric using an online survey, and investigate the relationship between comprehension and sentiment, demographics, and the definition itself.

Candice Schumann, Zhi Lang, Nicholas Mattei et al.

We propose a novel formulation of group fairness with biased feedback in the contextual multi-armed bandit (CMAB) setting. In the CMAB setting, a sequential decision maker must, at each time step, choose an arm to pull from a finite set of arms after observing some context for each of the potential arm pulls. In our model, arms are partitioned into two or more sensitive groups based on some protected feature(s) (e.g., age, race, or socio-economic status). Initial rewards received from pulling an arm may be distorted due to some unknown societal or measurement bias. We assume that in reality these groups are equal despite the biased feedback received by the agent. To alleviate this, we learn a societal bias term which can be used to both find the source of bias and to potentially fix the problem outside of the algorithm. We provide a novel algorithm that can accommodate this notion of fairness for an arbitrary number of groups, and provide a theoretical bound on the regret for our algorithm. We validate our algorithm using synthetic data and two real-world datasets for intervention settings wherein we want to allocate resources fairly across groups.

Michael J. Curry, John P. Dickerson, Karthik Abinav Sankararaman et al.

Rideshare platforms such as Uber and Lyft dynamically dispatch drivers to match riders' requests. We model the dispatching process in rideshare as a Markov chain that takes into account the geographic mobility of both drivers and riders over time. Prior work explores dispatch policies in the limit of such Markov chains; we characterize when this limit assumption is valid, under a variety of natural dispatch policies. We give explicit bounds on convergence in general, and exact (including constants) convergence rates for special cases. Then, on simulated and real transit data, we show that our bounds characterize convergence rates -- even when the necessary theoretical assumptions are relaxed. Additionally these policies compare well against a standard reinforcement learning algorithm which optimizes for profit without any convergence properties.