Showing 1–17 of 17 results for author: Baldini, I

Why Don't Prompt-Based Fairness Metrics Correlate?

Authors: Abdelrahman Zayed, Goncalo Mordido, Ioana Baldini, Sarath Chandar

Abstract: The widespread use of large language models has brought up essential questions about the potential biases these models might learn. This led to the development of several metrics aimed at evaluating and mitigating these biases. In this paper, we first demonstrate that prompt-based fairness metrics exhibit poor agreement, as measured by correlation, raising important questions about the reliability… ▽ More The widespread use of large language models has brought up essential questions about the potential biases these models might learn. This led to the development of several metrics aimed at evaluating and mitigating these biases. In this paper, we first demonstrate that prompt-based fairness metrics exhibit poor agreement, as measured by correlation, raising important questions about the reliability of fairness assessment using prompts. Then, we outline six relevant reasons why such a low correlation is observed across existing metrics. Based on these insights, we propose a method called Correlated Fairness Output (CAIRO) to enhance the correlation between fairness metrics. CAIRO augments the original prompts of a given fairness metric by using several pre-trained language models and then selects the combination of the augmented prompts that achieves the highest correlation across metrics. We show a significant improvement in Pearson correlation from 0.3 and 0.18 to 0.90 and 0.98 across metrics for gender and religion biases, respectively. Our code is available at https://github.com/chandar-lab/CAIRO. △ Less

Submitted 9 June, 2024; originally announced June 2024.

Comments: In Proceedings of ACL main 2024

Alignment Studio: Aligning Large Language Models to Particular Contextual Regulations

Authors: Swapnaja Achintalwar, Ioana Baldini, Djallel Bouneffouf, Joan Byamugisha, Maria Chang, Pierre Dognin, Eitan Farchi, Ndivhuwo Makondo, Aleksandra Mojsilovic, Manish Nagireddy, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Inkit Padhi, Orna Raz, Jesus Rios, Prasanna Sattigeri, Moninder Singh, Siphiwe Thwala, Rosario A. Uceda-Sosa, Kush R. Varshney

Abstract: The alignment of large language models is usually done by model providers to add or control behaviors that are common or universally understood across use cases and contexts. In contrast, in this article, we present an approach and architecture that empowers application developers to tune a model to their particular values, social norms, laws and other regulations, and orchestrate between potentia… ▽ More The alignment of large language models is usually done by model providers to add or control behaviors that are common or universally understood across use cases and contexts. In contrast, in this article, we present an approach and architecture that empowers application developers to tune a model to their particular values, social norms, laws and other regulations, and orchestrate between potentially conflicting requirements in context. We lay out three main components of such an Alignment Studio architecture: Framers, Instructors, and Auditors that work in concert to control the behavior of a language model. We illustrate this approach with a running example of aligning a company's internal-facing enterprise chatbot to its business conduct guidelines. △ Less

Submitted 8 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Comments: 7 pages, 5 figures

Detectors for Safe and Reliable LLMs: Implementations, Uses, and Limitations

Authors: Swapnaja Achintalwar, Adriana Alvarado Garcia, Ateret Anaby-Tavor, Ioana Baldini, Sara E. Berger, Bishwaranjan Bhattacharjee, Djallel Bouneffouf, Subhajit Chaudhury, Pin-Yu Chen, Lamogha Chiazor, Elizabeth M. Daly, Kirushikesh DB, Rogério Abreu de Paula, Pierre Dognin, Eitan Farchi, Soumya Ghosh, Michael Hind, Raya Horesh, George Kour, Ja Young Lee, Nishtha Madaan, Sameep Mehta, Erik Miehling, Keerthiram Murugesan, Manish Nagireddy , et al. (13 additional authors not shown)

Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are susceptible to a variety of risks, from non-faithful output to biased and toxic generations. Due to several limiting factors surrounding LLMs (training cost, API access, data availability, etc.), it may not always be feasible to impose direct safety constraints on a deployed model. Therefore, an efficient and reliable alternative is required. To this end, we presen… ▽ More Large language models (LLMs) are susceptible to a variety of risks, from non-faithful output to biased and toxic generations. Due to several limiting factors surrounding LLMs (training cost, API access, data availability, etc.), it may not always be feasible to impose direct safety constraints on a deployed model. Therefore, an efficient and reliable alternative is required. To this end, we present our ongoing efforts to create and deploy a library of detectors: compact and easy-to-build classification models that provide labels for various harms. In addition to the detectors themselves, we discuss a wide range of uses for these detector models - from acting as guardrails to enabling effective AI governance. We also deep dive into inherent challenges in their development and discuss future work aimed at making the detectors more reliable and broadening their scope. △ Less

Submitted 13 June, 2024; v1 submitted 9 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Fairness-Aware Structured Pruning in Transformers

Authors: Abdelrahman Zayed, Goncalo Mordido, Samira Shabanian, Ioana Baldini, Sarath Chandar

Abstract: The increasing size of large language models (LLMs) has introduced challenges in their training and inference. Removing model components is perceived as a solution to tackle the large model sizes, however, existing pruning methods solely focus on performance, without considering an essential aspect for the responsible use of LLMs: model fairness. It is crucial to address the fairness of LLMs towar… ▽ More The increasing size of large language models (LLMs) has introduced challenges in their training and inference. Removing model components is perceived as a solution to tackle the large model sizes, however, existing pruning methods solely focus on performance, without considering an essential aspect for the responsible use of LLMs: model fairness. It is crucial to address the fairness of LLMs towards diverse groups, such as women, Black people, LGBTQ+, Jewish communities, among others, as they are being deployed and available to a wide audience. In this work, first, we investigate how attention heads impact fairness and performance in pre-trained transformer-based language models. We then propose a novel method to prune the attention heads that negatively impact fairness while retaining the heads critical for performance, i.e. language modeling capabilities. Our approach is practical in terms of time and resources, as it does not require fine-tuning the final pruned, and fairer, model. Our findings demonstrate a reduction in gender bias by 19%, 19.5%, 39.5%, 34.7%, 23%, and 8% for DistilGPT-2, GPT-2, GPT-Neo of two different sizes, GPT-J, and Llama 2 models, respectively, in comparison to the biased model, with only a slight decrease in performance. △ Less

Submitted 23 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Comments: In Proceedings of AAAI 2024

SocialStigmaQA: A Benchmark to Uncover Stigma Amplification in Generative Language Models

Authors: Manish Nagireddy, Lamogha Chiazor, Moninder Singh, Ioana Baldini

Abstract: Current datasets for unwanted social bias auditing are limited to studying protected demographic features such as race and gender. In this work, we introduce a comprehensive benchmark that is meant to capture the amplification of social bias, via stigmas, in generative language models. Taking inspiration from social science research, we start with a documented list of 93 US-centric stigmas and cur… ▽ More Current datasets for unwanted social bias auditing are limited to studying protected demographic features such as race and gender. In this work, we introduce a comprehensive benchmark that is meant to capture the amplification of social bias, via stigmas, in generative language models. Taking inspiration from social science research, we start with a documented list of 93 US-centric stigmas and curate a question-answering (QA) dataset which involves simple social situations. Our benchmark, SocialStigmaQA, contains roughly 10K prompts, with a variety of prompt styles, carefully constructed to systematically test for both social bias and model robustness. We present results for SocialStigmaQA with two open source generative language models and we find that the proportion of socially biased output ranges from 45% to 59% across a variety of decoding strategies and prompting styles. We demonstrate that the deliberate design of the templates in our benchmark (e.g., adding biasing text to the prompt or using different verbs that change the answer that indicates bias) impacts the model tendencies to generate socially biased output. Additionally, through manual evaluation, we discover problematic patterns in the generated chain-of-thought output that range from subtle bias to lack of reasoning. Warning: This paper contains examples of text which are toxic, biased, and potentially harmful. △ Less

Submitted 27 December, 2023; v1 submitted 12 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Comments: AAAI 2024

Subtle Misogyny Detection and Mitigation: An Expert-Annotated Dataset

Authors: Brooklyn Sheppard, Anna Richter, Allison Cohen, Elizabeth Allyn Smith, Tamara Kneese, Carolyne Pelletier, Ioana Baldini, Yue Dong

Abstract: Using novel approaches to dataset development, the Biasly dataset captures the nuance and subtlety of misogyny in ways that are unique within the literature. Built in collaboration with multi-disciplinary experts and annotators themselves, the dataset contains annotations of movie subtitles, capturing colloquial expressions of misogyny in North American film. The dataset can be used for a range of… ▽ More Using novel approaches to dataset development, the Biasly dataset captures the nuance and subtlety of misogyny in ways that are unique within the literature. Built in collaboration with multi-disciplinary experts and annotators themselves, the dataset contains annotations of movie subtitles, capturing colloquial expressions of misogyny in North American film. The dataset can be used for a range of NLP tasks, including classification, severity score regression, and text generation for rewrites. In this paper, we discuss the methodology used, analyze the annotations obtained, and provide baselines using common NLP algorithms in the context of misogyny detection and mitigation. We hope this work will promote AI for social good in NLP for bias detection, explanation, and removal. △ Less

Submitted 15 November, 2023; originally announced November 2023.

Comments: 8 pages, 2 figures

Kee** Up with the Language Models: Robustness-Bias Interplay in NLI Data and Models

Authors: Ioana Baldini, Chhavi Yadav, Payel Das, Kush R. Varshney

Abstract: Auditing unwanted social bias in language models (LMs) is inherently hard due to the multidisciplinary nature of the work. In addition, the rapid evolution of LMs can make benchmarks irrelevant in no time. Bias auditing is further complicated by LM brittleness: when a presumably biased outcome is observed, is it due to model bias or model brittleness? We propose enlisting the models themselves to… ▽ More Auditing unwanted social bias in language models (LMs) is inherently hard due to the multidisciplinary nature of the work. In addition, the rapid evolution of LMs can make benchmarks irrelevant in no time. Bias auditing is further complicated by LM brittleness: when a presumably biased outcome is observed, is it due to model bias or model brittleness? We propose enlisting the models themselves to help construct bias auditing datasets that remain challenging, and introduce bias measures that distinguish between types of model errors. First, we extend an existing bias benchmark for NLI (BBNLI) using a combination of LM-generated lexical variations, adversarial filtering, and human validation. We demonstrate that the newly created dataset (BBNLInext) is more challenging than BBNLI: on average, BBNLI-next reduces the accuracy of state-of-the-art NLI models from 95.3%, as observed by BBNLI, to 58.6%. Second, we employ BBNLI-next to showcase the interplay between robustness and bias, and the subtlety in differentiating between the two. Third, we point out shortcomings in current bias scores used in the literature and propose bias measures that take into account pro-/anti-stereotype bias and model brittleness. We will publicly release the BBNLI-next dataset to inspire research on rapidly expanding benchmarks to keep up with model evolution, along with research on the robustness-bias interplay in bias auditing. Note: This paper contains offensive text examples. △ Less

Submitted 21 May, 2023; originally announced May 2023.

Write It Like You See It: Detectable Differences in Clinical Notes By Race Lead To Differential Model Recommendations

Authors: Hammaad Adam, Ming Ying Yang, Kenrick Cato, Ioana Baldini, Charles Senteio, Leo Anthony Celi, Jiaming Zeng, Moninder Singh, Marzyeh Ghassemi

Abstract: Clinical notes are becoming an increasingly important data source for machine learning (ML) applications in healthcare. Prior research has shown that deploying ML models can perpetuate existing biases against racial minorities, as bias can be implicitly embedded in data. In this study, we investigate the level of implicit race information available to ML models and human experts and the implicatio… ▽ More Clinical notes are becoming an increasingly important data source for machine learning (ML) applications in healthcare. Prior research has shown that deploying ML models can perpetuate existing biases against racial minorities, as bias can be implicitly embedded in data. In this study, we investigate the level of implicit race information available to ML models and human experts and the implications of model-detectable differences in clinical notes. Our work makes three key contributions. First, we find that models can identify patient self-reported race from clinical notes even when the notes are stripped of explicit indicators of race. Second, we determine that human experts are not able to accurately predict patient race from the same redacted clinical notes. Finally, we demonstrate the potential harm of this implicit information in a simulation study, and show that models trained on these race-redacted clinical notes can still perpetuate existing biases in clinical treatment decisions. △ Less

Submitted 1 November, 2022; v1 submitted 8 May, 2022; originally announced May 2022.

Journal ref: Proceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES 2022)

Downstream Fairness Caveats with Synthetic Healthcare Data

Authors: Karan Bhanot, Ioana Baldini, Dennis Wei, Jiaming Zeng, Kristin P. Bennett

Abstract: This paper evaluates synthetically generated healthcare data for biases and investigates the effect of fairness mitigation techniques on utility-fairness. Privacy laws limit access to health data such as Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) to preserve patient privacy. Albeit essential, these laws hinder research reproducibility. Synthetic data is a viable solution that can enable access to data simi… ▽ More This paper evaluates synthetically generated healthcare data for biases and investigates the effect of fairness mitigation techniques on utility-fairness. Privacy laws limit access to health data such as Electronic Medical Records (EMRs) to preserve patient privacy. Albeit essential, these laws hinder research reproducibility. Synthetic data is a viable solution that can enable access to data similar to real healthcare data without privacy risks. Healthcare datasets may have biases in which certain protected groups might experience worse outcomes than others. With the real data having biases, the fairness of synthetically generated health data comes into question. In this paper, we evaluate the fairness of models generated on two healthcare datasets for gender and race biases. We generate synthetic versions of the dataset using a Generative Adversarial Network called HealthGAN, and compare the real and synthetic model's balanced accuracy and fairness scores. We find that synthetic data has different fairness properties compared to real data and fairness mitigation techniques perform differently, highlighting that synthetic data is not bias free. △ Less

Submitted 8 March, 2022; originally announced March 2022.

Ground-Truth, Whose Truth? -- Examining the Challenges with Annotating Toxic Text Datasets

Authors: Kofi Arhin, Ioana Baldini, Dennis Wei, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Moninder Singh

Abstract: The use of machine learning (ML)-based language models (LMs) to monitor content online is on the rise. For toxic text identification, task-specific fine-tuning of these models are performed using datasets labeled by annotators who provide ground-truth labels in an effort to distinguish between offensive and normal content. These projects have led to the development, improvement, and expansion of l… ▽ More The use of machine learning (ML)-based language models (LMs) to monitor content online is on the rise. For toxic text identification, task-specific fine-tuning of these models are performed using datasets labeled by annotators who provide ground-truth labels in an effort to distinguish between offensive and normal content. These projects have led to the development, improvement, and expansion of large datasets over time, and have contributed immensely to research on natural language. Despite the achievements, existing evidence suggests that ML models built on these datasets do not always result in desirable outcomes. Therefore, using a design science research (DSR) approach, this study examines selected toxic text datasets with the goal of shedding light on some of the inherent issues and contributing to discussions on navigating these challenges for existing and future projects. To achieve the goal of the study, we re-annotate samples from three toxic text datasets and find that a multi-label approach to annotating toxic text samples can help to improve dataset quality. While this approach may not improve the traditional metric of inter-annotator agreement, it may better capture dependence on context and diversity in annotators. We discuss the implications of these results for both theory and practice. △ Less

Submitted 7 December, 2021; originally announced December 2021.

Comments: 15 pages

Your fairness may vary: Pretrained language model fairness in toxic text classification

Authors: Ioana Baldini, Dennis Wei, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Mikhail Yurochkin, Moninder Singh

Abstract: The popularity of pretrained language models in natural language processing systems calls for a careful evaluation of such models in down-stream tasks, which have a higher potential for societal impact. The evaluation of such systems usually focuses on accuracy measures. Our findings in this paper call for attention to be paid to fairness measures as well. Through the analysis of more than a dozen… ▽ More The popularity of pretrained language models in natural language processing systems calls for a careful evaluation of such models in down-stream tasks, which have a higher potential for societal impact. The evaluation of such systems usually focuses on accuracy measures. Our findings in this paper call for attention to be paid to fairness measures as well. Through the analysis of more than a dozen pretrained language models of varying sizes on two toxic text classification tasks (English), we demonstrate that focusing on accuracy measures alone can lead to models with wide variation in fairness characteristics. Specifically, we observe that fairness can vary even more than accuracy with increasing training data size and different random initializations. At the same time, we find that little of the fairness variation is explained by model size, despite claims in the literature. To improve model fairness without retraining, we show that two post-processing methods developed for structured, tabular data can be successfully applied to a range of pretrained language models. Warning: This paper contains samples of offensive text. △ Less

Submitted 13 April, 2022; v1 submitted 2 August, 2021; originally announced August 2021.

Comments: Findings of ACL 2022

Biomedical Interpretable Entity Representations

Authors: Diego Garcia-Olano, Yasumasa Onoe, Ioana Baldini, Joydeep Ghosh, Byron C. Wallace, Kush R. Varshney

Abstract: Pre-trained language models induce dense entity representations that offer strong performance on entity-centric NLP tasks, but such representations are not immediately interpretable. This can be a barrier to model uptake in important domains such as biomedicine. There has been recent work on general interpretable representation learning (Onoe and Durrett, 2020), but these domain-agnostic represent… ▽ More Pre-trained language models induce dense entity representations that offer strong performance on entity-centric NLP tasks, but such representations are not immediately interpretable. This can be a barrier to model uptake in important domains such as biomedicine. There has been recent work on general interpretable representation learning (Onoe and Durrett, 2020), but these domain-agnostic representations do not readily transfer to the important domain of biomedicine. In this paper, we create a new entity type system and training set from a large corpus of biomedical texts by map** entities to concepts in a medical ontology, and from these to Wikipedia pages whose categories are our types. From this map** we derive Biomedical Interpretable Entity Representations(BIERs), in which dimensions correspond to fine-grained entity types, and values are predicted probabilities that a given entity is of the corresponding type. We propose a novel method that exploits BIER's final sparse and intermediate dense representations to facilitate model and entity type debugging. We show that BIERs achieve strong performance in biomedical tasks including named entity disambiguation and entity label classification, and we provide error analysis to highlight the utility of their interpretability, particularly in low-supervision settings. Finally, we provide our induced 68K biomedical type system, the corresponding 37 million triples of derived data used to train BIER models and our best performing model. △ Less

Submitted 17 June, 2021; originally announced June 2021.

Comments: Accepted into Findings of ACL-IJCNLP 2021

Automated Meta-Analysis: A Causal Learning Perspective

Authors: Lu Cheng, Dmitriy A. Katz-Rogozhnikov, Kush R. Varshney, Ioana Baldini

Abstract: Meta-analysis is a systematic approach for understanding a phenomenon by analyzing the results of many previously published experimental studies. It is central to deriving conclusions about the summary effect of treatments and interventions in medicine, poverty alleviation, and other applications with social impact. Unfortunately, meta-analysis involves great human effort, rendering a process that… ▽ More Meta-analysis is a systematic approach for understanding a phenomenon by analyzing the results of many previously published experimental studies. It is central to deriving conclusions about the summary effect of treatments and interventions in medicine, poverty alleviation, and other applications with social impact. Unfortunately, meta-analysis involves great human effort, rendering a process that is extremely inefficient and vulnerable to human bias. To overcome these issues, we work toward automating meta-analysis with a focus on controlling for risks of bias. In particular, we first extract information from scientific publications written in natural language. From a novel causal learning perspective, we then propose to frame automated meta-analysis -- based on the input of the first step -- as a multiple-causal-inference problem where the summary effect is obtained through intervention. Built upon existing efforts for automating the initial steps of meta-analysis, the proposed approach achieves the goal of automated meta-analysis and largely reduces the human effort involved. Evaluations on synthetic and semi-synthetic datasets show that this approach can yield promising results. △ Less

Submitted 9 April, 2021; originally announced April 2021.

Comments: 11 pages, 6 figures

Drug Repurposing for Cancer: An NLP Approach to Identify Low-Cost Therapies

Authors: Shivashankar Subramanian, Ioana Baldini, Sushma Ravichandran, Dmitriy A. Katz-Rogozhnikov, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Prasanna Sattigeri, Kush R. Varshney, Annmarie Wang, Pradeep Mangalath, Laura B. Kleiman

Abstract: More than 200 generic drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for non-cancer indications have shown promise for treating cancer. Due to their long history of safe patient use, low cost, and widespread availability, repurposing of generic drugs represents a major opportunity to rapidly improve outcomes for cancer patients and reduce healthcare costs worldwide. Evidence on the effica… ▽ More More than 200 generic drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for non-cancer indications have shown promise for treating cancer. Due to their long history of safe patient use, low cost, and widespread availability, repurposing of generic drugs represents a major opportunity to rapidly improve outcomes for cancer patients and reduce healthcare costs worldwide. Evidence on the efficacy of non-cancer generic drugs being tested for cancer exists in scientific publications, but trying to manually identify and extract such evidence is intractable. In this paper, we introduce a system to automate this evidence extraction from PubMed abstracts. Our primary contribution is to define the natural language processing pipeline required to obtain such evidence, comprising the following modules: querying, filtering, cancer type entity extraction, therapeutic association classification, and study type classification. Using the subject matter expertise on our team, we create our own datasets for these specialized domain-specific tasks. We obtain promising performance in each of the modules by utilizing modern language modeling techniques and plan to treat them as baseline approaches for future improvement of individual components. △ Less

Submitted 5 December, 2019; v1 submitted 18 November, 2019; originally announced November 2019.

How Data Scientists Work Together With Domain Experts in Scientific Collaborations: To Find The Right Answer Or To Ask The Right Question?

Authors: Yaoli Mao, Dakuo Wang, Michael Muller, Kush R. Varshney, Ioana Baldini, Casey Dugan, AleksandraMojsilović

Abstract: In recent years there has been an increasing trend in which data scientists and domain experts work together to tackle complex scientific questions. However, such collaborations often face challenges. In this paper, we aim to decipher this collaboration complexity through a semi-structured interview study with 22 interviewees from teams of bio-medical scientists collaborating with data scientists.… ▽ More In recent years there has been an increasing trend in which data scientists and domain experts work together to tackle complex scientific questions. However, such collaborations often face challenges. In this paper, we aim to decipher this collaboration complexity through a semi-structured interview study with 22 interviewees from teams of bio-medical scientists collaborating with data scientists. In the analysis, we adopt the Olsons' four-dimensions framework proposed in Distance Matters to code interview transcripts. Our findings suggest that besides the glitches in the collaboration readiness, technology readiness, and coupling of work dimensions, the tensions that exist in the common ground building process influence the collaboration outcomes, and then persist in the actual collaboration process. In contrast to prior works' general account of building a high level of common ground, the breakdowns of content common ground together with the strengthen of process common ground in this process is more beneficial for scientific discovery. We discuss why that is and what the design suggestions are, and conclude the paper with future directions and limitations. △ Less

Submitted 8 September, 2019; originally announced September 2019.

Teaching machines to understand data science code by semantic enrichment of dataflow graphs

Authors: Evan Patterson, Ioana Baldini, Aleksandra Mojsilovic, Kush R. Varshney

Abstract: Your computer is continuously executing programs, but does it really understand them? Not in any meaningful sense. That burden falls upon human knowledge workers, who are increasingly asked to write and understand code. They deserve to have intelligent tools that reveal the connections between code and its subject matter. Towards this prospect, we develop an AI system that forms semantic represent… ▽ More Your computer is continuously executing programs, but does it really understand them? Not in any meaningful sense. That burden falls upon human knowledge workers, who are increasingly asked to write and understand code. They deserve to have intelligent tools that reveal the connections between code and its subject matter. Towards this prospect, we develop an AI system that forms semantic representations of computer programs, using techniques from knowledge representation and program analysis. To create the representations, we introduce an algorithm for enriching dataflow graphs with semantic information. The semantic enrichment algorithm is undergirded by a new ontology language for modeling computer programs and a new ontology about data science, written in this language. Throughout the paper, we focus on code written by data scientists and we locate our work within a larger movement towards collaborative, open, and reproducible science. △ Less

Submitted 25 January, 2019; v1 submitted 16 July, 2018; originally announced July 2018.

Comments: 33 pages. Significantly expanded from previous version

Serverless Computing: Current Trends and Open Problems

Authors: Ioana Baldini, Paul Castro, Kerry Chang, Perry Cheng, Stephen Fink, Vatche Ishakian, Nick Mitchell, Vinod Muthusamy, Rodric Rabbah, Aleksander Slominski, Philippe Suter

Abstract: Serverless computing has emerged as a new compelling paradigm for the deployment of applications and services. It represents an evolution of cloud programming models, abstractions, and platforms, and is a testament to the maturity and wide adoption of cloud technologies. In this chapter, we survey existing serverless platforms from industry, academia, and open source projects, identify key charact… ▽ More Serverless computing has emerged as a new compelling paradigm for the deployment of applications and services. It represents an evolution of cloud programming models, abstractions, and platforms, and is a testament to the maturity and wide adoption of cloud technologies. In this chapter, we survey existing serverless platforms from industry, academia, and open source projects, identify key characteristics and use cases, and describe technical challenges and open problems. △ Less

Submitted 10 June, 2017; originally announced June 2017.