Machine Learning is the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software. However, there are many tasks for which this is difficult or impossible. These can be divided into four general categories. First, there are problems for which there exist no human experts. For example, in modern automated manufacturing facilities, there is a need to predict machine failures before they occur by analyzing sensor readings. Because the machines are new, there are no human experts who can be interviewed by a programmer to provide the knowledge necessary to build a computer system. A machine learning system can study recorded data and subsequent machine failures and learn prediction rules. Second, there are problems where human experts exist, but where they are unable to explain their expertise. This is the case in many perceptual tasks, such as speech recognition, hand-writing recognition, and natural language understanding. Virtually all humans exhibit expert-level abilities on these tasks, but none of them can describe the detailed steps that they follow as they perform them. Fortunately, humans can provide machines with examples of the inputs and correct outputs for these tasks, so machine learning algorithms can learn to map the inputs to the outputs. Third, there are problems where phenomena are changing rapidly. In finance, for example, people would like to predict the future behavior of the stock market, of consumer purchases, or of exchange rates. These behaviors change frequently, so that even if a programmer could construct a good predictive computer program, it would need to be rewritten frequently. A learning program can relieve the programmer of this burden by constantly modifying and tuning a set of learned prediction rules. Fourth, there are applications that need to be customized for each computer user separately. Consider, for example, a program to filter unwanted electronic mail messages. Different users will need different filters. It is unreasonable to expect each user to program his or her own rules, and it is infeasible to provide every user with a software engineer to keep the rules up-to-date. A machine learning system can learn which mail messages the user rejects and maintain the filtering rules automatically. Machine learning addresses many of the same research questions as the fields of statistics, data mining, and psychology, but with differences of emphasis. Statistics focuses on understanding the phenomena that have generated the data, often with the goal of testing different hypotheses about those phenomena. Data mining seeks to find patterns in the data that are understandable by people. Psychological studies of human learning aspire to understand the mechanisms underlying the various learning behaviors exhibited by people (concept learning, skill acquisition, strategy change, etc.).

Machine learning

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AI

Usually, a proof of a theorem contains more knowledge than the mere fact that the theorem is true. For instance, to prove that a graph is Hamiltonian it suffices to exhibit a Hamiltonian tour in it; however, this seems to contain more knowledge than the single bit Hamiltonian/non-Hamiltonian.In this paper a computational complexity theory of the “knowledge” contained in a proof is developed. Zero-knowledge proofs are defined as those proofs that convey no additional knowledge other than the correctness of the proposition in question. Examples of zero-knowledge proof systems are given for the languages of quadratic residuosity and 'quadratic nonresiduosity. These are the first examples of zero-knowledge proofs for languages not known to be efficiently recognizable.

/pdf/the-knowledge-complexity-of-interactive-proof-systems-31apre0ecf.pdf

The knowledge complexity of interactive proof-systems

In the last years, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has achieved a notable momentum that may deliver the best of expectations over many application sectors across the field. For this to occur, the entire community stands in front of the barrier of explainability, an inherent problem of AI techniques brought by sub-symbolism (e.g. ensembles or Deep Neural Networks) that were not present in the last hype of AI. Paradigms underlying this problem fall within the so-called eXplainable AI (XAI) field, which is acknowledged as a crucial feature for the practical deployment of AI models. This overview examines the existing literature in the field of XAI, including a prospect toward what is yet to be reached. We summarize previous efforts to define explainability in Machine Learning, establishing a novel definition that covers prior conceptual propositions with a major focus on the audience for which explainability is sought. We then propose and discuss about a taxonomy of recent contributions related to the explainability of different Machine Learning models, including those aimed at Deep Learning methods for which a second taxonomy is built. This literature analysis serves as the background for a series of challenges faced by XAI, such as the crossroads between data fusion and explainability. Our prospects lead toward the concept of Responsible Artificial Intelligence, namely, a methodology for the large-scale implementation of AI methods in real organizations with fairness, model explainability and accountability at its core. Our ultimate goal is to provide newcomers to XAI with a reference material in order to stimulate future research advances, but also to encourage experts and professionals from other disciplines to embrace the benefits of AI in their activity sectors, without any prior bias for its lack of interpretability.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AI.

the cambridge handbook of the learning sciences is available in our digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly. Our books collection spans in multiple locations, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of our books like this one. Merely said, the the cambridge handbook of the learning sciences is universally compatible with any devices to read.

The Cambridge Handbook Of The Learning Sciences

Ranking and scoring are ubiquitous We consider the setting in which an institution, called a ranker, evaluates a set of individuals based on demographic, behavioral or other characteristics The final output is a ranking that represents the relative quality of the individuals While automatic and therefore seemingly objective, rankers can, and often do, discriminate against individuals and systematically disadvantage members of protected groups This warrants a careful study of the fairness of a ranking scheme, to enable data science for social good applications, among othersIn this paper we propose fairness measures for ranked outputs We develop a data generation procedure that allows us to systematically control the degree of unfairness in the output, and study the behavior of our measures on these datasets We then apply our proposed measures to several real datasets, and detect cases of bias Finally, we show preliminary results of incorporating our ranked fairness measures into an optimization framework, and show potential for improving fairness of ranked outputs while maintaining accuracyThe code implementing all parts of this work is publicly available at https://githubcom/DataResponsibly/FairRank

https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3085504.3085526

Measuring Fairness in Ranked Outputs

Workflow provenance typically assumes that each module is a "black-box", so that each output depends on all inputs (coarse-grained dependencies). Furthermore, it does not model the internal state of a module, which can change between repeated executions. In practice, however, an output may depend on only a small subset of the inputs (fine-grained dependencies) as well as on the internal state of the module. We present a novel provenance framework that marries database-style and workflow-style provenance, by using Pig Latin to expose the functionality of modules, thus capturing internal state and fine-grained dependencies. A critical ingredient in our solution is the use of a novel form of provenance graph that models module invocations and yields a compact representation of fine-grained workflow provenance. It also enables a number of novel graph transformation operations, allowing to choose the desired level of granularity in provenance querying (ZoomIn and ZoomOut), and supporting "what-if" workflow analytic queries. We implemented our approach in the Lipstick system and developed a benchmark in support of a systematic performance evaluation. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of tracking and querying fine-grained workflow provenance.

/pdf/putting-lipstick-on-pig-enabling-database-style-workflow-3uszz523q1.pdf

Putting lipstick on pig: enabling database-style workflow provenance

A method and system for automatically and adaptively determining query execution plans for parametric queries. A first classifier trained by an initial set of training points is generated. A query workload and/or database statistics are dynamically updated. A new set of training points is collected off-line. Using the new set of training points, the first classifier is modified into a second classifier. A database query is received at a runtime subsequent to the off-line phase. The query includes predicates having parameter markers bound to actual values. The predicates are associated with selectivities. A mapping of the selectivities into a plan determines the query execution plan. The determined query execution plan is included in an augmented set of training points, where the augmented set includes the initial set and the new set.

Automatically and adaptively determining execution plans for queries with parameter markers

Items from a database are often ranked based on a combination of criteria. The weight given to each criterion in the combination can greatly affect the fairness of the produced ranking, for example, preferring men over women. A user may have the flexibility to choose combinations that weigh these criteria differently, within limits. In this paper, we develop a system that helps users choose criterion weights that lead to greater fairness. We consider ranking functions that compute the score of each item as a weighted sum of (numeric) attribute values, and then sort items on their score. Each ranking function can be expressed as a point in a multi-dimensional space. For a broad range of fairness criteria, including proportionality, we show how to efficiently identify regions in this space that satisfy these criteria. Using this identification method, our system is able to tell users whether their proposed ranking function satisfies the desired fairness criteria and, if it does not, to suggest the smallest modification that does. Our extensive experiments on real datasets demonstrate that our methods are able to find solutions that satisfy fairness criteria effectively (usually with only small changes to proposed weight vectors) and efficiently (in interactive time, after some initial pre-processing).

https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3299869.3300079

Designing Fair Ranking Schemes

The popularity of collaborative tagging sites presents a unique opportunity to explore keyword search in a context where query results are determined by the opinion of a network of taggers related to a seeker. In this paper, we present the first in-depth study of network-aware search. We investigate efficient top-k processing when the score of an answer is computed as its popularity among members of a seeker's network. We argue that obvious adaptations of top-k algorithms are too space-intensive, due to the dependence of scores on the seeker's network. We therefore develop algorithms based on maintaining score upper-bounds. The global upper-bound approach maintains a single score upper-bound for every pair of item and tag, over the entire collection of users. The resulting bounds are very coarse. We thus investigate clustering seekers based on similar behavior of their networks. We show that finding the optimal clustering of seekers is intractable, but we provide heuristic methods that give substantial time improvements. We then give an optimization that can benefit smaller populations of seekers based on clustering of taggers. Our results are supported by extensive experiments on del.icio.us datasets.

/pdf/efficient-network-aware-search-in-collaborative-tagging-wy66cgd1g1.pdf

Julia Stoyanovich

Papers

Measuring Fairness in Ranked Outputs

Putting lipstick on pig: enabling database-style workflow provenance

Automatically and adaptively determining execution plans for queries with parameter markers

Designing Fair Ranking Schemes

Efficient network aware search in collaborative tagging sites