Claudio Mayrink Verdun

AI
h-index1
3papers
29citations
Novelty65%
AI Score37

3 Papers

4.2AIJul 11, 2024Code
Multi-Group Proportional Representation in Retrieval

Alex Oesterling, Claudio Mayrink Verdun, Carol Xuan Long et al.

Image search and retrieval tasks can perpetuate harmful stereotypes, erase cultural identities, and amplify social disparities. Current approaches to mitigate these representational harms balance the number of retrieved items across population groups defined by a small number of (often binary) attributes. However, most existing methods overlook intersectional groups determined by combinations of group attributes, such as gender, race, and ethnicity. We introduce Multi-Group Proportional Representation (MPR), a novel metric that measures representation across intersectional groups. We develop practical methods for estimating MPR, provide theoretical guarantees, and propose optimization algorithms to ensure MPR in retrieval. We demonstrate that existing methods optimizing for equal and proportional representation metrics may fail to promote MPR. Crucially, our work shows that optimizing MPR yields more proportional representation across multiple intersectional groups specified by a rich function class, often with minimal compromise in retrieval accuracy.

16.7CRMay 13, 2025Code
Optimized Couplings for Watermarking Large Language Models

Dor Tsur, Carol Xuan Long, Claudio Mayrink Verdun et al.

Large-language models (LLMs) are now able to produce text that is, in many cases, seemingly indistinguishable from human-generated content. This has fueled the development of watermarks that imprint a ``signal'' in LLM-generated text with minimal perturbation of an LLM's output. This paper provides an analysis of text watermarking in a one-shot setting. Through the lens of hypothesis testing with side information, we formulate and analyze the fundamental trade-off between watermark detection power and distortion in generated textual quality. We argue that a key component in watermark design is generating a coupling between the side information shared with the watermark detector and a random partition of the LLM vocabulary. Our analysis identifies the optimal coupling and randomization strategy under the worst-case LLM next-token distribution that satisfies a min-entropy constraint. We provide a closed-form expression of the resulting detection rate under the proposed scheme and quantify the cost in a max-min sense. Finally, we provide an array of numerical results, comparing the proposed scheme with the theoretical optimum and existing schemes, in both synthetic data and LLM watermarking. Our code is available at https://github.com/Carol-Long/CC_Watermark

22.9AIFeb 10, 2025
AI Alignment at Your Discretion

Maarten Buyl, Hadi Khalaf, Claudio Mayrink Verdun et al.

In AI alignment, extensive latitude must be granted to annotators, either human or algorithmic, to judge which model outputs are `better' or `safer.' We refer to this latitude as alignment discretion. Such discretion remains largely unexamined, posing two risks: (i) annotators may use their power of discretion arbitrarily, and (ii) models may fail to mimic this discretion. To study this phenomenon, we draw on legal concepts of discretion that structure how decision-making authority is conferred and exercised, particularly in cases where principles conflict or their application is unclear or irrelevant. Extended to AI alignment, discretion is required when alignment principles and rules are (inevitably) conflicting or indecisive. We present a set of metrics to systematically analyze when and how discretion in AI alignment is exercised, such that both risks (i) and (ii) can be observed. Moreover, we distinguish between human and algorithmic discretion and analyze the discrepancy between them. By measuring both human and algorithmic discretion over safety alignment datasets, we reveal layers of discretion in the alignment process that were previously unaccounted for. Furthermore, we demonstrate how algorithms trained on these datasets develop their own forms of discretion in interpreting and applying these principles, which challenges the purpose of having any principles at all. Our paper presents the first step towards formalizing this core gap in current alignment processes, and we call on the community to further scrutinize and control alignment discretion.