Dino Pedreschi

Dino Pedreschi, Luca Pappalardo, Emanuele Ferragina et al.

Human-AI coevolution, defined as a process in which humans and AI algorithms continuously influence each other, increasingly characterises our society, but is understudied in artificial intelligence and complexity science literature. Recommender systems and assistants play a prominent role in human-AI coevolution, as they permeate many facets of daily life and influence human choices on online platforms. The interaction between users and AI results in a potentially endless feedback loop, wherein users' choices generate data to train AI models, which, in turn, shape subsequent user preferences. This human-AI feedback loop has peculiar characteristics compared to traditional human-machine interaction and gives rise to complex and often ``unintended'' social outcomes. This paper introduces Coevolution AI as the cornerstone for a new field of study at the intersection between AI and complexity science focused on the theoretical, empirical, and mathematical investigation of the human-AI feedback loop. In doing so, we: (i) outline the pros and cons of existing methodologies and highlight shortcomings and potential ways for capturing feedback loop mechanisms; (ii) propose a reflection at the intersection between complexity science, AI and society; (iii) provide real-world examples for different human-AI ecosystems; and (iv) illustrate challenges to the creation of such a field of study, conceptualising them at increasing levels of abstraction, i.e., technical, epistemological, legal and socio-political.

Gabriele Barlacchi, Margherita Lalli, Emanuele Ferragina et al.

Recommender systems shape individual choices through feedback loops in which user behavior and algorithmic recommendations coevolve over time. The systemic effects of these loops remain poorly understood, in part due to unrealistic assumptions in existing simulation studies. We propose a feedback-loop model that captures implicit feedback, periodic retraining, probabilistic adoption of recommendations, and heterogeneous recommender systems. We apply the framework on online retail and music streaming data and analyze systemic effects of the feedback loop. We find that increasing recommender adoption may lead to a progressive diversification of individual consumption, while collective demand is redistributed in model- and domain-dependent ways, often amplifying popularity concentration. Temporal analyses further reveal that apparent increases in individual diversity observed in static evaluations are illusory: when adoption is fixed and time unfolds, individual diversity consistently decreases across all models. Our results highlight the need to move beyond static evaluations and explicitly account for feedback-loop dynamics when designing recommender systems.

Clara Punzi, Roberto Pellungrini, Mattia Setzu et al.

Everyday we increasingly rely on machine learning models to automate and support high-stake tasks and decisions. This growing presence means that humans are now constantly interacting with machine learning-based systems, training and using models everyday. Several different techniques in computer science literature account for the human interaction with machine learning systems, but their classification is sparse and the goals varied. This survey proposes a taxonomy of Hybrid Decision Making Systems, providing both a conceptual and technical framework for understanding how current computer science literature models interaction between humans and machines.

Daphne Lenders, Andrea Pugnana, Roberto Pellungrini et al.

Abstaining classifiers have the option to refrain from providing a prediction for instances that are difficult to classify. The abstention mechanism is designed to trade off the classifier's performance on the accepted data while ensuring a minimum number of predictions. In this setting, often fairness concerns arise when the abstention mechanism solely reduces errors for the majority groups of the data, resulting in increased performance differences across demographic groups. While there exist a bunch of methods that aim to reduce discrimination when abstaining, there is no mechanism that can do so in an explainable way. In this paper, we fill this gap by introducing Interpretable and Fair Abstaining Classifier IFAC, an algorithm that can reject predictions both based on their uncertainty and their unfairness. By rejecting possibly unfair predictions, our method reduces error and positive decision rate differences across demographic groups of the non-rejected data. Since the unfairness-based rejections are based on an interpretable-by-design method, i.e., rule-based fairness checks and situation testing, we create a transparent process that can empower human decision-makers to review the unfair predictions and make more just decisions for them. This explainable aspect is especially important in light of recent AI regulations, mandating that any high-risk decision task should be overseen by human experts to reduce discrimination risks.

Daniele Gambetta, Gizem Gezici, Fosca Giannotti et al.

As synthetic content increasingly infiltrates the web, generative AI models may be retrained on their own outputs: a process termed "autophagy". This leads to model collapse: a progressive loss of performance and diversity across generations. Recent studies have examined the emergence of model collapse across various generative AI models and data types, and have proposed mitigation strategies that rely on incorporating human-authored content. However, current characterizations of model collapse remain limited, and existing mitigation methods assume reliable knowledge of whether training data is human-authored or AI-generated. In this paper, we address these gaps by introducing new measures that characterise collapse directly from a model's next-token probability distributions, rather than from properties of AI-generated text. Using these measures, we show that the degree of collapse depends on the complexity of the initial training set, as well as on the extent of autophagy. Our experiments prompt a new suggestion: that model collapse occurs when a model trains on data that does not "surprise" it. We express this hypothesis in terms of the well-known Free Energy Principle in cognitive science. Building on this insight, we propose a practical mitigation strategy: filtering training items by high surplexity, maximising the surprise of the model. Unlike existing methods, this approach does not require distinguishing between human- and AI-generated data. Experiments across datasets and models demonstrate that our strategy is at least as effective as human-data baselines, and even more effective in reducing distributional skewedness. Our results provide a richer understanding of model collapse and point toward more resilient approaches for training generative AI systems in environments increasingly saturated with synthetic data.

Simone Piaggesi, Riccardo Guidotti, Fosca Giannotti et al.

Post-hoc explainability is essential for understanding black-box machine learning models. Surrogate-based techniques are widely used for local and global model-agnostic explanations but have significant limitations. Local surrogates capture non-linearities but are computationally expensive and sensitive to parameters, while global surrogates are more efficient but struggle with complex local behaviors. In this paper, we present ILLUME, a flexible and interpretable framework grounded in representation learning, that can be integrated with various surrogate models to provide explanations for any black-box classifier. Specifically, our approach combines a globally trained surrogate with instance-specific linear transformations learned with a meta-encoder to generate both local and global explanations. Through extensive empirical evaluations, we demonstrate the effectiveness of ILLUME in producing feature attributions and decision rules that are not only accurate but also robust and faithful to the black-box, thus providing a unified explanation framework that effectively addresses the limitations of traditional surrogate methods.

Luca Pappalardo, Salvatore Citraro, Giuliano Cornacchia et al.

Recommendation systems and assistants (in short, recommenders) influence through online platforms most actions of our daily lives, suggesting items or providing solutions based on users' preferences or requests. This survey systematically reviews, categories, and discusses the impact of recommenders in four human-AI ecosystems -- social media, online retail, urban mapping and generative AI ecosystems. Its scope is to systematise a fast-growing field in which terminologies employed to classify methodologies and outcomes are fragmented and unsystematic. This is a crucial contribution to the literature because terminologies vary substantially across disciplines and ecosystems, hindering comparison and accumulation of knowledge in the field. We follow the customary steps of qualitative systematic review, gathering 154 articles from different disciplines to develop a parsimonious taxonomy of methodologies employed (empirical, simulation, observational, controlled), outcomes observed (concentration, content degradation, discrimination, diversity, echo chamber, filter bubble, homogenisation, polarisation, radicalisation, volume), and their level of analysis (individual, item, and ecosystem). We systematically discuss substantive and methodological commonalities across ecosystems, and highlight potential avenues for future research. The survey is addressed to scholars and practitioners interested in different human-AI ecosystems, policymakers and institutional stakeholders who want to understand better the measurable outcomes of recommenders, and tech companies who wish to obtain a systematic view of the impact of their recommenders.

Francesco Bodria, Fosca Giannotti, Riccardo Guidotti et al.

The widespread adoption of black-box models in Artificial Intelligence has enhanced the need for explanation methods to reveal how these obscure models reach specific decisions. Retrieving explanations is fundamental to unveil possible biases and to resolve practical or ethical issues. Nowadays, the literature is full of methods with different explanations. We provide a categorization of explanation methods based on the type of explanation returned. We present the most recent and widely used explainers, and we show a visual comparison among explanations and a quantitative benchmarking.

Mattia Setzu, Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has come to prominence as one of the major components of our society, with applications in most aspects of our lives. In this field, complex and highly nonlinear machine learning models such as ensemble models, deep neural networks, and Support Vector Machines have consistently shown remarkable accuracy in solving complex tasks. Although accurate, AI models often are "black boxes" which we are not able to understand. Relying on these models has a multifaceted impact and raises significant concerns about their transparency. Applications in sensitive and critical domains are a strong motivational factor in trying to understand the behavior of black boxes. We propose to address this issue by providing an interpretable layer on top of black box models by aggregating "local" explanations. We present GLocalX, a "local-first" model agnostic explanation method. Starting from local explanations expressed in form of local decision rules, GLocalX iteratively generalizes them into global explanations by hierarchically aggregating them. Our goal is to learn accurate yet simple interpretable models to emulate the given black box, and, if possible, replace it entirely. We validate GLocalX in a set of experiments in standard and constrained settings with limited or no access to either data or local explanations. Experiments show that GLocalX is able to accurately emulate several models with simple and small models, reaching state-of-the-art performance against natively global solutions. Our findings show how it is often possible to achieve a high level of both accuracy and comprehensibility of classification models, even in complex domains with high-dimensional data, without necessarily trading one property for the other. This is a key requirement for a trustworthy AI, necessary for adoption in high-stakes decision making applications.

Ioanna Miliou, Xinyue Xiong, Salvatore Rinzivillo et al.

Increased availability of epidemiological data, novel digital data streams, and the rise of powerful machine learning approaches have generated a surge of research activity on real-time epidemic forecast systems. In this paper, we propose the use of a novel data source, namely retail market data to improve seasonal influenza forecasting. Specifically, we consider supermarket retail data as a proxy signal for influenza, through the identification of sentinel baskets, i.e., products bought together by a population of selected customers. We develop a nowcasting and forecasting framework that provides estimates for influenza incidence in Italy up to 4 weeks ahead. We make use of the Support Vector Regression (SVR) model to produce the predictions of seasonal flu incidence. Our predictions outperform both a baseline autoregressive model and a second baseline based on product purchases. The results show quantitatively the value of incorporating retail market data in forecasting models, acting as a proxy that can be used for the real-time analysis of epidemics.

Cecilia Panigutti, Alan Perotti, Andrè Panisson et al.

The pervasive application of algorithmic decision-making is raising concerns on the risk of unintended bias in AI systems deployed in critical settings such as healthcare. The detection and mitigation of biased models is a very delicate task which should be tackled with care and involving domain experts in the loop. In this paper we introduce FairLens, a methodology for discovering and explaining biases. We show how our tool can be used to audit a fictional commercial black-box model acting as a clinical decision support system. In this scenario, the healthcare facility experts can use FairLens on their own historical data to discover the model's biases before incorporating it into the clinical decision flow. FairLens first stratifies the available patient data according to attributes such as age, ethnicity, gender and insurance; it then assesses the model performance on such subgroups of patients identifying those in need of expert evaluation. Finally, building on recent state-of-the-art XAI (eXplainable Artificial Intelligence) techniques, FairLens explains which elements in patients' clinical history drive the model error in the selected subgroup. Therefore, FairLens allows experts to investigate whether to trust the model and to spotlight group-specific biases that might constitute potential fairness issues.

Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Stan Matwin et al.

We present an approach to explain the decisions of black box models for image classification. While using the black box to label images, our explanation method exploits the latent feature space learned through an adversarial autoencoder. The proposed method first generates exemplar images in the latent feature space and learns a decision tree classifier. Then, it selects and decodes exemplars respecting local decision rules. Finally, it visualizes them in a manner that shows to the user how the exemplars can be modified to either stay within their class, or to become counter-factuals by "morphing" into another class. Since we focus on black box decision systems for image classification, the explanation obtained from the exemplars also provides a saliency map highlighting the areas of the image that contribute to its classification, and areas of the image that push it into another class. We present the results of an experimental evaluation on three datasets and two black box models. Besides providing the most useful and interpretable explanations, we show that the proposed method outperforms existing explainers in terms of fidelity, relevance, coherence, and stability.

Dino Pedreschi, Fosca Giannotti, Riccardo Guidotti et al.

Black box systems for automated decision making, often based on machine learning over (big) data, map a user's features into a class or a score without exposing the reasons why. This is problematic not only for lack of transparency, but also for possible biases hidden in the algorithms, due to human prejudices and collection artifacts hidden in the training data, which may lead to unfair or wrong decisions. We introduce the local-to-global framework for black box explanation, a novel approach with promising early results, which paves the road for a wide spectrum of future developments along three dimensions: (i) the language for expressing explanations in terms of highly expressive logic-based rules, with a statistical and causal interpretation; (ii) the inference of local explanations aimed at revealing the logic of the decision adopted for a specific instance by querying and auditing the black box in the vicinity of the target instance; (iii), the bottom-up generalization of the many local explanations into simple global ones, with algorithms that optimize the quality and comprehensibility of explanations.

Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Salvatore Ruggieri et al.

The recent years have witnessed the rise of accurate but obscure decision systems which hide the logic of their internal decision processes to the users. The lack of explanations for the decisions of black box systems is a key ethical issue, and a limitation to the adoption of machine learning components in socially sensitive and safety-critical contexts. %Therefore, we need explanations that reveals the reasons why a predictor takes a certain decision. In this paper we focus on the problem of black box outcome explanation, i.e., explaining the reasons of the decision taken on a specific instance. We propose LORE, an agnostic method able to provide interpretable and faithful explanations. LORE first leans a local interpretable predictor on a synthetic neighborhood generated by a genetic algorithm. Then it derives from the logic of the local interpretable predictor a meaningful explanation consisting of: a decision rule, which explains the reasons of the decision; and a set of counterfactual rules, suggesting the changes in the instance's features that lead to a different outcome. Wide experiments show that LORE outperforms existing methods and baselines both in the quality of explanations and in the accuracy in mimicking the black box.

Luca Pappalardo, Paolo Cintia, Paolo Ferragina et al.

The problem of evaluating the performance of soccer players is attracting the interest of many companies and the scientific community, thanks to the availability of massive data capturing all the events generated during a match (e.g., tackles, passes, shots, etc.). Unfortunately, there is no consolidated and widely accepted metric for measuring performance quality in all of its facets. In this paper, we design and implement PlayeRank, a data-driven framework that offers a principled multi-dimensional and role-aware evaluation of the performance of soccer players. We build our framework by deploying a massive dataset of soccer-logs and consisting of millions of match events pertaining to four seasons of 18 prominent soccer competitions. By comparing PlayeRank to known algorithms for performance evaluation in soccer, and by exploiting a dataset of players' evaluations made by professional soccer scouts, we show that PlayeRank significantly outperforms the competitors. We also explore the ratings produced by {\sf PlayeRank} and discover interesting patterns about the nature of excellent performances and what distinguishes the top players from the others. At the end, we explore some applications of PlayeRank -- i.e. searching players and player versatility --- showing its flexibility and efficiency, which makes it worth to be used in the design of a scalable platform for soccer analytics.

Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Salvatore Ruggieri et al.

In the last years many accurate decision support systems have been constructed as black boxes, that is as systems that hide their internal logic to the user. This lack of explanation constitutes both a practical and an ethical issue. The literature reports many approaches aimed at overcoming this crucial weakness sometimes at the cost of scarifying accuracy for interpretability. The applications in which black box decision systems can be used are various, and each approach is typically developed to provide a solution for a specific problem and, as a consequence, delineating explicitly or implicitly its own definition of interpretability and explanation. The aim of this paper is to provide a classification of the main problems addressed in the literature with respect to the notion of explanation and the type of black box system. Given a problem definition, a black box type, and a desired explanation this survey should help the researcher to find the proposals more useful for his own work. The proposed classification of approaches to open black box models should also be useful for putting the many research open questions in perspective.

Luca Pappalardo, Paolo Cintia, Dino Pedreschi et al.

Humans are routinely asked to evaluate the performance of other individuals, separating success from failure and affecting outcomes from science to education and sports. Yet, in many contexts, the metrics driving the human evaluation process remain unclear. Here we analyse a massive dataset capturing players' evaluations by human judges to explore human perception of performance in soccer, the world's most popular sport. We use machine learning to design an artificial judge which accurately reproduces human evaluation, allowing us to demonstrate how human observers are biased towards diverse contextual features. By investigating the structure of the artificial judge, we uncover the aspects of the players' behavior which attract the attention of human judges, demonstrating that human evaluation is based on a noticeability heuristic where only feature values far from the norm are considered to rate an individual's performance.

Christian Bessiere, Luc De Raedt, Tias Guns et al.

Constraint programming is used for a variety of real-world optimisation problems, such as planning, scheduling and resource allocation problems. At the same time, one continuously gathers vast amounts of data about these problems. Current constraint programming software does not exploit such data to update schedules, resources and plans. We propose a new framework, that we call the Inductive Constraint Programming loop. In this approach data is gathered and analyzed systematically, in order to dynamically revise and adapt constraints and optimization criteria. Inductive Constraint Programming aims at bridging the gap between the areas of data mining and machine learning on the one hand, and constraint programming on the other hand.