-
(Unfair) Norms in Fairness Research: A Meta-Analysis
Authors:
Jennifer Chien,
A. Stevie Bergman,
Kevin R. McKee,
Nenad Tomasev,
Vinodkumar Prabhakaran,
Rida Qadri,
Nahema Marchal,
William Isaac
Abstract:
Algorithmic fairness has emerged as a critical concern in artificial intelligence (AI) research. However, the development of fair AI systems is not an objective process. Fairness is an inherently subjective concept, shaped by the values, experiences, and identities of those involved in research and development. To better understand the norms and values embedded in current fairness research, we con…
▽ More
Algorithmic fairness has emerged as a critical concern in artificial intelligence (AI) research. However, the development of fair AI systems is not an objective process. Fairness is an inherently subjective concept, shaped by the values, experiences, and identities of those involved in research and development. To better understand the norms and values embedded in current fairness research, we conduct a meta-analysis of algorithmic fairness papers from two leading conferences on AI fairness and ethics, AIES and FAccT, covering a final sample of 139 papers over the period from 2018 to 2022. Our investigation reveals two concerning trends: first, a US-centric perspective dominates throughout fairness research; and second, fairness studies exhibit a widespread reliance on binary codifications of human identity (e.g., "Black/White", "male/female"). These findings highlight how current research often overlooks the complexities of identity and lived experiences, ultimately failing to represent diverse global contexts when defining algorithmic bias and fairness. We discuss the limitations of these research design choices and offer recommendations for fostering more inclusive and representative approaches to fairness in AI systems, urging a paradigm shift that embraces nuanced, global understandings of human identity and values.
△ Less
Submitted 17 June, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
Towards Responsible Development of Generative AI for Education: An Evaluation-Driven Approach
Authors:
Irina Jurenka,
Markus Kunesch,
Kevin R. McKee,
Daniel Gillick,
Shaojian Zhu,
Sara Wiltberger,
Shubham Milind Phal,
Katherine Hermann,
Daniel Kasenberg,
Avishkar Bhoopchand,
Ankit Anand,
Miruna Pîslar,
Stephanie Chan,
Lisa Wang,
Jennifer She,
Parsa Mahmoudieh,
Aliya Rysbek,
Wei-Jen Ko,
Andrea Huber,
Brett Wiltshire,
Gal Elidan,
Roni Rabin,
Jasmin Rubinovitz,
Amit Pitaru,
Mac McAllister
, et al. (49 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
A major challenge facing the world is the provision of equitable and universal access to quality education. Recent advances in generative AI (gen AI) have created excitement about the potential of new technologies to offer a personal tutor for every learner and a teaching assistant for every teacher. The full extent of this dream, however, has not yet materialised. We argue that this is primarily…
▽ More
A major challenge facing the world is the provision of equitable and universal access to quality education. Recent advances in generative AI (gen AI) have created excitement about the potential of new technologies to offer a personal tutor for every learner and a teaching assistant for every teacher. The full extent of this dream, however, has not yet materialised. We argue that this is primarily due to the difficulties with verbalising pedagogical intuitions into gen AI prompts and the lack of good evaluation practices, reinforced by the challenges in defining excellent pedagogy. Here we present our work collaborating with learners and educators to translate high level principles from learning science into a pragmatic set of seven diverse educational benchmarks, spanning quantitative, qualitative, automatic and human evaluations; and to develop a new set of fine-tuning datasets to improve the pedagogical capabilities of Gemini, introducing LearnLM-Tutor. Our evaluations show that LearnLM-Tutor is consistently preferred over a prompt tuned Gemini by educators and learners on a number of pedagogical dimensions. We hope that this work can serve as a first step towards developing a comprehensive educational evaluation framework, and that this can enable rapid progress within the AI and EdTech communities towards maximising the positive impact of gen AI in education.
△ Less
Submitted 19 July, 2024; v1 submitted 21 May, 2024;
originally announced July 2024.
-
Generative AI Misuse: A Taxonomy of Tactics and Insights from Real-World Data
Authors:
Nahema Marchal,
Rachel Xu,
Rasmi Elasmar,
Iason Gabriel,
Beth Goldberg,
William Isaac
Abstract:
Generative, multimodal artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers transformative potential across industries, but its misuse poses significant risks. Prior research has shed light on the potential of advanced AI systems to be exploited for malicious purposes. However, we still lack a concrete understanding of how GenAI models are specifically exploited or abused in practice, including the tactics empl…
▽ More
Generative, multimodal artificial intelligence (GenAI) offers transformative potential across industries, but its misuse poses significant risks. Prior research has shed light on the potential of advanced AI systems to be exploited for malicious purposes. However, we still lack a concrete understanding of how GenAI models are specifically exploited or abused in practice, including the tactics employed to inflict harm. In this paper, we present a taxonomy of GenAI misuse tactics, informed by existing academic literature and a qualitative analysis of approximately 200 observed incidents of misuse reported between January 2023 and March 2024. Through this analysis, we illuminate key and novel patterns in misuse during this time period, including potential motivations, strategies, and how attackers leverage and abuse system capabilities across modalities (e.g. image, text, audio, video) in the wild.
△ Less
Submitted 21 June, 2024; v1 submitted 19 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
STAR: SocioTechnical Approach to Red Teaming Language Models
Authors:
Laura Weidinger,
John Mellor,
Bernat Guillen Pegueroles,
Nahema Marchal,
Ravin Kumar,
Kristian Lum,
Canfer Akbulut,
Mark Diaz,
Stevie Bergman,
Mikel Rodriguez,
Verena Rieser,
William Isaac
Abstract:
This research introduces STAR, a sociotechnical framework that improves on current best practices for red teaming safety of large language models. STAR makes two key contributions: it enhances steerability by generating parameterised instructions for human red teamers, leading to improved coverage of the risk surface. Parameterised instructions also provide more detailed insights into model failur…
▽ More
This research introduces STAR, a sociotechnical framework that improves on current best practices for red teaming safety of large language models. STAR makes two key contributions: it enhances steerability by generating parameterised instructions for human red teamers, leading to improved coverage of the risk surface. Parameterised instructions also provide more detailed insights into model failures at no increased cost. Second, STAR improves signal quality by matching demographics to assess harms for specific groups, resulting in more sensitive annotations. STAR further employs a novel step of arbitration to leverage diverse viewpoints and improve label reliability, treating disagreement not as noise but as a valuable contribution to signal quality.
△ Less
Submitted 6 August, 2024; v1 submitted 17 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants
Authors:
Iason Gabriel,
Arianna Manzini,
Geoff Keeling,
Lisa Anne Hendricks,
Verena Rieser,
Hasan Iqbal,
Nenad Tomašev,
Ira Ktena,
Zachary Kenton,
Mikel Rodriguez,
Seliem El-Sayed,
Sasha Brown,
Canfer Akbulut,
Andrew Trask,
Edward Hughes,
A. Stevie Bergman,
Renee Shelby,
Nahema Marchal,
Conor Griffin,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Laura Weidinger,
Winnie Street,
Benjamin Lange,
Alex Ingerman,
Alison Lentz
, et al. (32 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, pro…
▽ More
This paper focuses on the opportunities and the ethical and societal risks posed by advanced AI assistants. We define advanced AI assistants as artificial agents with natural language interfaces, whose function is to plan and execute sequences of actions on behalf of a user, across one or more domains, in line with the user's expectations. The paper starts by considering the technology itself, providing an overview of AI assistants, their technical foundations and potential range of applications. It then explores questions around AI value alignment, well-being, safety and malicious uses. Extending the circle of inquiry further, we next consider the relationship between advanced AI assistants and individual users in more detail, exploring topics such as manipulation and persuasion, anthropomorphism, appropriate relationships, trust and privacy. With this analysis in place, we consider the deployment of advanced assistants at a societal scale, focusing on cooperation, equity and access, misinformation, economic impact, the environment and how best to evaluate advanced AI assistants. Finally, we conclude by providing a range of recommendations for researchers, developers, policymakers and public stakeholders.
△ Less
Submitted 28 April, 2024; v1 submitted 24 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
A Mechanism-Based Approach to Mitigating Harms from Persuasive Generative AI
Authors:
Seliem El-Sayed,
Canfer Akbulut,
Amanda McCroskery,
Geoff Keeling,
Zachary Kenton,
Zaria Jalan,
Nahema Marchal,
Arianna Manzini,
Toby Shevlane,
Shannon Vallor,
Daniel Susser,
Matija Franklin,
Sophie Bridgers,
Harry Law,
Matthew Rahtz,
Murray Shanahan,
Michael Henry Tessler,
Arthur Douillard,
Tom Everitt,
Sasha Brown
Abstract:
Recent generative AI systems have demonstrated more advanced persuasive capabilities and are increasingly permeating areas of life where they can influence decision-making. Generative AI presents a new risk profile of persuasion due the opportunity for reciprocal exchange and prolonged interactions. This has led to growing concerns about harms from AI persuasion and how they can be mitigated, high…
▽ More
Recent generative AI systems have demonstrated more advanced persuasive capabilities and are increasingly permeating areas of life where they can influence decision-making. Generative AI presents a new risk profile of persuasion due the opportunity for reciprocal exchange and prolonged interactions. This has led to growing concerns about harms from AI persuasion and how they can be mitigated, highlighting the need for a systematic study of AI persuasion. The current definitions of AI persuasion are unclear and related harms are insufficiently studied. Existing harm mitigation approaches prioritise harms from the outcome of persuasion over harms from the process of persuasion. In this paper, we lay the groundwork for the systematic study of AI persuasion. We first put forward definitions of persuasive generative AI. We distinguish between rationally persuasive generative AI, which relies on providing relevant facts, sound reasoning, or other forms of trustworthy evidence, and manipulative generative AI, which relies on taking advantage of cognitive biases and heuristics or misrepresenting information. We also put forward a map of harms from AI persuasion, including definitions and examples of economic, physical, environmental, psychological, sociocultural, political, privacy, and autonomy harm. We then introduce a map of mechanisms that contribute to harmful persuasion. Lastly, we provide an overview of approaches that can be used to mitigate against process harms of persuasion, including prompt engineering for manipulation classification and red teaming. Future work will operationalise these mitigations and study the interaction between different types of mechanisms of persuasion.
△ Less
Submitted 23 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systems
Authors:
Laura Weidinger,
Maribeth Rauh,
Nahema Marchal,
Arianna Manzini,
Lisa Anne Hendricks,
Juan Mateos-Garcia,
Stevie Bergman,
Jackie Kay,
Conor Griffin,
Ben Bariach,
Iason Gabriel,
Verena Rieser,
William Isaac
Abstract:
Generative AI systems produce a range of risks. To ensure the safety of generative AI systems, these risks must be evaluated. In this paper, we make two main contributions toward establishing such evaluations. First, we propose a three-layered framework that takes a structured, sociotechnical approach to evaluating these risks. This framework encompasses capability evaluations, which are the main…
▽ More
Generative AI systems produce a range of risks. To ensure the safety of generative AI systems, these risks must be evaluated. In this paper, we make two main contributions toward establishing such evaluations. First, we propose a three-layered framework that takes a structured, sociotechnical approach to evaluating these risks. This framework encompasses capability evaluations, which are the main current approach to safety evaluation. It then reaches further by building on system safety principles, particularly the insight that context determines whether a given capability may cause harm. To account for relevant context, our framework adds human interaction and systemic impacts as additional layers of evaluation. Second, we survey the current state of safety evaluation of generative AI systems and create a repository of existing evaluations. Three salient evaluation gaps emerge from this analysis. We propose ways forward to closing these gaps, outlining practical steps as well as roles and responsibilities for different actors. Sociotechnical safety evaluation is a tractable approach to the robust and comprehensive safety evaluation of generative AI systems.
△ Less
Submitted 31 October, 2023; v1 submitted 18 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Model evaluation for extreme risks
Authors:
Toby Shevlane,
Sebastian Farquhar,
Ben Garfinkel,
Mary Phuong,
Jess Whittlestone,
Jade Leung,
Daniel Kokotajlo,
Nahema Marchal,
Markus Anderljung,
Noam Kolt,
Lewis Ho,
Divya Siddarth,
Shahar Avin,
Will Hawkins,
Been Kim,
Iason Gabriel,
Vijay Bolina,
Jack Clark,
Yoshua Bengio,
Paul Christiano,
Allan Dafoe
Abstract:
Current approaches to building general-purpose AI systems tend to produce systems with both beneficial and harmful capabilities. Further progress in AI development could lead to capabilities that pose extreme risks, such as offensive cyber capabilities or strong manipulation skills. We explain why model evaluation is critical for addressing extreme risks. Developers must be able to identify danger…
▽ More
Current approaches to building general-purpose AI systems tend to produce systems with both beneficial and harmful capabilities. Further progress in AI development could lead to capabilities that pose extreme risks, such as offensive cyber capabilities or strong manipulation skills. We explain why model evaluation is critical for addressing extreme risks. Developers must be able to identify dangerous capabilities (through "dangerous capability evaluations") and the propensity of models to apply their capabilities for harm (through "alignment evaluations"). These evaluations will become critical for keeping policymakers and other stakeholders informed, and for making responsible decisions about model training, deployment, and security.
△ Less
Submitted 22 September, 2023; v1 submitted 24 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
Early Recall, Late Precision: Multi-Robot Semantic Object Mapping under Operational Constraints in Perceptually-Degraded Environments
Authors:
Xianmei Lei,
Taeyeon Kim,
Nicolas Marchal,
Daniel Pastor,
Barry Ridge,
Frederik Schöller,
Edward Terry,
Fernando Chavez,
Thomas Touma,
Kyohei Otsu,
Ali Agha
Abstract:
Semantic object mapping in uncertain, perceptually degraded environments during long-range multi-robot autonomous exploration tasks such as search-and-rescue is important and challenging. During such missions, high recall is desirable to avoid missing true target objects and high precision is also critical to avoid wasting valuable operational time on false positives. Given recent advancements in…
▽ More
Semantic object mapping in uncertain, perceptually degraded environments during long-range multi-robot autonomous exploration tasks such as search-and-rescue is important and challenging. During such missions, high recall is desirable to avoid missing true target objects and high precision is also critical to avoid wasting valuable operational time on false positives. Given recent advancements in visual perception algorithms, the former is largely solvable autonomously, but the latter is difficult to address without the supervision of a human operator. However, operational constraints such as mission time, computational requirements, mesh network bandwidth and so on, can make the operator's task infeasible unless properly managed. We propose the Early Recall, Late Precision (EaRLaP) semantic object mapping pipeline to solve this problem. EaRLaP was used by Team CoSTAR in DARPA Subterranean Challenge, where it successfully detected all the artifacts encountered by the team of robots. We will discuss these results and performance of the EaRLaP on various datasets.
△ Less
Submitted 20 June, 2022;
originally announced June 2022.
-
Junk News & Information Sharing During the 2019 UK General Election
Authors:
Nahema Marchal,
Bence Kollanyi,
Lisa-Maria Neudert,
Hubert Au,
Philip N. Howard
Abstract:
Today, an estimated 75% of the British public access information about politics and public life online, and 40% do so via social media. With this context in mind, we investigate information sharing patterns over social media in the lead-up to the 2019 UK General Elections, and ask: (1) What type of political news and information were social media users sharing on Twitter ahead of the vote? (2) How…
▽ More
Today, an estimated 75% of the British public access information about politics and public life online, and 40% do so via social media. With this context in mind, we investigate information sharing patterns over social media in the lead-up to the 2019 UK General Elections, and ask: (1) What type of political news and information were social media users sharing on Twitter ahead of the vote? (2) How much of it is extremist, sensationalist, or conspiratorial junk news? (3) How much public engagement did these sites get on Facebook in the weeks leading and (4) What are the most common narratives and themes relayed by junk news outlets
△ Less
Submitted 27 February, 2020;
originally announced February 2020.
-
Echo Chambers Exist! (But They're Full of Opposing Views)
Authors:
Jonathan Bright,
Nahema Marchal,
Bharath Ganesh,
Stevan Rudinac
Abstract:
The theory of echo chambers, which suggests that online political discussions take place in conditions of ideological homogeneity, has recently gained popularity as an explanation for patterns of political polarization and radicalization observed in many democratic countries. However, while micro-level experimental work has shown evidence that individuals may gravitate towards information that sup…
▽ More
The theory of echo chambers, which suggests that online political discussions take place in conditions of ideological homogeneity, has recently gained popularity as an explanation for patterns of political polarization and radicalization observed in many democratic countries. However, while micro-level experimental work has shown evidence that individuals may gravitate towards information that supports their beliefs, recent macro-level studies have cast doubt on whether this tendency generates echo chambers in practice, instead suggesting that cross-cutting exposures are a common feature of digital life. In this article, we offer an explanation for these diverging results. Building on cognitive dissonance theory, and making use of observational trace data taken from an online white nationalist website, we explore how individuals in an ideological 'echo chamber' engage with opposing viewpoints. We show that this type of exposure, far from being detrimental to radical online discussions, is actually a core feature of such spaces that encourages people to stay engaged. The most common 'echoes' in this echo chamber are in fact the sound of opposing viewpoints being undermined and marginalized. Hence echo chambers exist not only in spite of but thanks to the unifying presence of oppositional viewpoints. We conclude with reflections on policy implications of our study for those seeking to promote a more moderate political internet.
△ Less
Submitted 30 January, 2020;
originally announced January 2020.
-
Learning Densities in Feature Space for Reliable Segmentation of Indoor Scenes
Authors:
Nicolas Marchal,
Charlotte Moraldo,
Roland Siegwart,
Hermann Blum,
Cesar Cadena,
Abel Gawel
Abstract:
Deep learning has enabled remarkable advances in scene understanding, particularly in semantic segmentation tasks. Yet, current state of the art approaches are limited to a closed set of classes, and fail when facing novel elements, also known as out of distribution (OoD) data. This is a problem as autonomous agents will inevitably come across a wide range of objects, all of which cannot be includ…
▽ More
Deep learning has enabled remarkable advances in scene understanding, particularly in semantic segmentation tasks. Yet, current state of the art approaches are limited to a closed set of classes, and fail when facing novel elements, also known as out of distribution (OoD) data. This is a problem as autonomous agents will inevitably come across a wide range of objects, all of which cannot be included during training. We propose a novel method to distinguish any object (foreground) from empty building structure (background) in indoor environments. We use normalizing flow to estimate the probability distribution of high-dimensional background descriptors. Foreground objects are therefore detected as areas in an image for which the descriptors are unlikely given the background distribution. As our method does not explicitly learn the representation of individual objects, its performance generalizes well outside of the training examples. Our model results in an innovative solution to reliably segment foreground from background in indoor scenes, which opens the way to a safer deployment of robots in human environments.
△ Less
Submitted 13 January, 2020; v1 submitted 1 August, 2019;
originally announced August 2019.