Johannes Schneider

Johannes Schneider

We ask: Does focusing on classes predicted as likely improve model predictions? We aim for an affirmative answer by proposing two novel test-time fine-tuning methods to improve uncertain model predictions. Instead of greedily selecting the most likely class, we introduce an additional step, \emph{focus on the likely classes}, to refine predictions. By applying a theoretically motivated single gradient descent step with a large learning rate, we refine predictions when an initial forward pass indicates high uncertainty. This aligns predictions more closely with the ideal of assigning zero probability to less plausible outcomes. The experimental evaluation demonstrates accuracy gains for one of our methods, which emphasizes shared features among likely classes, across diverse text and image domain models. %Our theoretical discussion provides a deeper understanding, highlighting the varying impact of shared and non-shared features among (focus) classes. %Our discussion also suggests an interesting view on standard, offline training vs. test-time training: Opposing optimization rationales regarding breadth of feature dependence are preferable during each training phase.

Jonas Bokstaller, Julia Altheimer, Julian Dormehl et al.

Across various sectors applications of eXplainableAI (XAI) gained momentum as the increasing black-boxedness of prevailing Machine Learning (ML) models became apparent. In parallel, Large Language Models (LLMs) significantly developed in their abilities to understand human language and complex patterns. By combining both, this paper presents a novel reference architecture for the interpretation of XAI through an interactive chatbot powered by a fine-tuned LLM. We instantiate the reference architecture in the context of State-of-Health (SoH) prediction for batteries and validate its design in multiple evaluation and demonstration rounds. The evaluation indicates that the implemented prototype enhances the human interpretability of ML, especially for users with less experience with XAI.

Johannes Schneider, Rene Abraham, Christian Meske et al.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) governance regulates the exercise of authority and control over the management of AI. It aims at leveraging AI through effective use of data and minimization of AI-related cost and risk. While topics such as AI governance and AI ethics are thoroughly discussed on a theoretical, philosophical, societal and regulatory level, there is limited work on AI governance targeted to companies and corporations. This work views AI products as systems, where key functionality is delivered by machine learning (ML) models leveraging (training) data. We derive a conceptual framework by synthesizing literature on AI and related fields such as ML. Our framework decomposes AI governance into governance of data, (ML) models and (AI) systems along four dimensions. It relates to existing IT and data governance frameworks and practices. It can be adopted by practitioners and academics alike. For practitioners the synthesis of mainly research papers, but also practitioner publications and publications of regulatory bodies provides a valuable starting point to implement AI governance, while for academics the paper highlights a number of areas of AI governance that deserve more attention.

Johannes Schneider, Avi Bernstein, Jan Vom Brocke et al.

All methodologies for detecting plagiarism to date have focused on the final digital "outcome", such as a document or source code. Our novel approach takes the creation process into account using logged events collected by special software or by the macro recorders found in most office applications. We look at an author's interaction logs with the software used to create the work. Detection relies on comparing the histograms of multiple logs' command use. A work is classified as plagiarism if its log deviates too much from logs of "honestly created" works or if its log is too similar to another log. The technique supports the detection of plagiarism for digital outcomes that stem from \emph{unique} tasks, such as theses and \emph{equal} tasks such as assignments for which the same problem sets are solved by multiple students. Focusing on the latter case, we evaluate this approach using logs collected by an interactive development environment (IDE) from more than sixty students who completed three programming assignments.