Search

Over the past few years, machine learning models have significantly increased in size and complexity, especially in the area of generative AI such as large language models. These models require massive amounts of data andcomputecapacitytotrain,totheextentthatconcerns over the training data (such as protected or private content)cannotbepracticallyaddressedbyretrainingthe model"fromscratch"withthequestionabledataremoved or altered. Furthermore, despite significant efforts and controls dedicated to ensuring that training corpora are properly curated and composed, the sheer volume re- quiredmakesitinfeasibletomanuallyinspecteachdatum comprising a training corpus. One potential approach to training corpus data defects is model disgorgement, by which we broadly mean the elimination or reduction of not only any improperly used data, but also the effects of improperly used data on any component of an ML model. Model disgorgement techniques can be used to address a wide range of issues, such as reducing bias or toxicity, increasing fidelity, and ensuring responsible use of intellectual property. In this paper, we survey the land- scape of model disgorgement methods and introduce a taxonomyofdisgorgementtechniquesthatareapplicable to modern ML systems. In particular, we investigate the variousmeaningsof"removingtheeffects"ofdataonthe trained model in a way that does not require retraining from scratch [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The notion of common sense is invoked so frequently in contexts as diverse as everyday conversation, political debates, and evaluations of artificial intelligence that its meaning might be surmised to be unproblematic. Surprisingly, however, neither the intrinsic properties of common sense knowledge (what makes a claim commonsensical) nor the degree to which it is shared by people (its "commonness") have been characterized empirically. In this paper, we introduce an analytical framework for quantifying both these elements of common sense. First, we define the commonsensicality of individual claims and people in terms of the latter's propensity to agree on the former and their awareness of one another's agreement. Second, we formalize the commonness of common sense as a clique detection problem on a bipartite belief graph of people and claims, defining pq common sense as the fraction q of claims shared by a fraction p of people. Evaluating our framework on a dataset of 2,046 raters evaluating 4,407 diverse claims, we find that commonsensicality aligns most closely with plainly worded, fact-like statements about everyday physical reality. Psychometric attributes such as social perceptiveness influence individual common sense, but surprisingly demographic factors such as age or gender do not. Finally, we find that collective common sense is rare: At most, a small fraction p of people agree on more than a small fraction q of claims. Together, these results undercut universalistic beliefs about common sense and raise questions about its variability that are relevant both to human and artificial intelligence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the emergence of AI as a new frontier in behavioral science. It discusses a study that compares the decision-making of AI chatbots, specifically ChatGPT-3 and ChatGPT-4, with that of humans using classical behavioral assessments. The study reveals that AI models have distinct preferences and behaviors, leading to the development of a new research direction called "AI Behavioral Science." The article also examines the potential benefits and challenges of studying AI behavior, including its impact on human decision-making, bias correction, and policy design. It emphasizes the need for a comprehensive behavioral assessment framework and the engineering of AI behavior. Furthermore, the article discusses the potential impact of AI integration on human behavior and culture, such as algorithmic bias, cognitive decline, and the promotion of equality. The document includes references to various research papers and studies on biased programmers, biased data, AI ethics, recommender systems, social media, news consumption, and polarization, making it a valuable resource for library patrons researching these specific topics. [Extracted from the article]