-
DWARF: Disease-weighted network for attention map refinement
Authors:
Haozhe Luo,
Aurélie Pahud de Mortanges,
Oana Inel,
Abraham Bernstein,
Mauricio Reyes
Abstract:
The interpretability of deep learning is crucial for evaluating the reliability of medical imaging models and reducing the risks of inaccurate patient recommendations. This study addresses the "human out of the loop" and "trustworthiness" issues in medical image analysis by integrating medical professionals into the interpretability process. We propose a disease-weighted attention map refinement n…
▽ More
The interpretability of deep learning is crucial for evaluating the reliability of medical imaging models and reducing the risks of inaccurate patient recommendations. This study addresses the "human out of the loop" and "trustworthiness" issues in medical image analysis by integrating medical professionals into the interpretability process. We propose a disease-weighted attention map refinement network (DWARF) that leverages expert feedback to enhance model relevance and accuracy. Our method employs cyclic training to iteratively improve diagnostic performance, generating precise and interpretable feature maps. Experimental results demonstrate significant improvements in interpretability and diagnostic accuracy across multiple medical imaging datasets. This approach fosters effective collaboration between AI systems and healthcare professionals, ultimately aiming to improve patient outcomes
△ Less
Submitted 28 June, 2024; v1 submitted 24 June, 2024;
originally announced June 2024.
-
Adversarial Nibbler: An Open Red-Teaming Method for Identifying Diverse Harms in Text-to-Image Generation
Authors:
Jessica Quaye,
Alicia Parrish,
Oana Inel,
Charvi Rastogi,
Hannah Rose Kirk,
Minsuk Kahng,
Erin van Liemt,
Max Bartolo,
Jess Tsang,
Justin White,
Nathan Clement,
Rafael Mosquera,
Juan Ciro,
Vijay Janapa Reddi,
Lora Aroyo
Abstract:
With the rise of text-to-image (T2I) generative AI models reaching wide audiences, it is critical to evaluate model robustness against non-obvious attacks to mitigate the generation of offensive images. By focusing on ``implicitly adversarial'' prompts (those that trigger T2I models to generate unsafe images for non-obvious reasons), we isolate a set of difficult safety issues that human creativit…
▽ More
With the rise of text-to-image (T2I) generative AI models reaching wide audiences, it is critical to evaluate model robustness against non-obvious attacks to mitigate the generation of offensive images. By focusing on ``implicitly adversarial'' prompts (those that trigger T2I models to generate unsafe images for non-obvious reasons), we isolate a set of difficult safety issues that human creativity is well-suited to uncover. To this end, we built the Adversarial Nibbler Challenge, a red-teaming methodology for crowdsourcing a diverse set of implicitly adversarial prompts. We have assembled a suite of state-of-the-art T2I models, employed a simple user interface to identify and annotate harms, and engaged diverse populations to capture long-tail safety issues that may be overlooked in standard testing. The challenge is run in consecutive rounds to enable a sustained discovery and analysis of safety pitfalls in T2I models.
In this paper, we present an in-depth account of our methodology, a systematic study of novel attack strategies and discussion of safety failures revealed by challenge participants. We also release a companion visualization tool for easy exploration and derivation of insights from the dataset. The first challenge round resulted in over 10k prompt-image pairs with machine annotations for safety. A subset of 1.5k samples contains rich human annotations of harm types and attack styles. We find that 14% of images that humans consider harmful are mislabeled as ``safe'' by machines. We have identified new attack strategies that highlight the complexity of ensuring T2I model robustness. Our findings emphasize the necessity of continual auditing and adaptation as new vulnerabilities emerge. We are confident that this work will enable proactive, iterative safety assessments and promote responsible development of T2I models.
△ Less
Submitted 13 May, 2024; v1 submitted 14 February, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
-
Collect, Measure, Repeat: Reliability Factors for Responsible AI Data Collection
Authors:
Oana Inel,
Tim Draws,
Lora Aroyo
Abstract:
The rapid entry of machine learning approaches in our daily activities and high-stakes domains demands transparency and scrutiny of their fairness and reliability. To help gauge machine learning models' robustness, research typically focuses on the massive datasets used for their deployment, e.g., creating and maintaining documentation for understanding their origin, process of development, and et…
▽ More
The rapid entry of machine learning approaches in our daily activities and high-stakes domains demands transparency and scrutiny of their fairness and reliability. To help gauge machine learning models' robustness, research typically focuses on the massive datasets used for their deployment, e.g., creating and maintaining documentation for understanding their origin, process of development, and ethical considerations. However, data collection for AI is still typically a one-off practice, and oftentimes datasets collected for a certain purpose or application are reused for a different problem. Additionally, dataset annotations may not be representative over time, contain ambiguous or erroneous annotations, or be unable to generalize across issues or domains. Recent research has shown these practices might lead to unfair, biased, or inaccurate outcomes. We argue that data collection for AI should be performed in a responsible manner where the quality of the data is thoroughly scrutinized and measured through a systematic set of appropriate metrics. In this paper, we propose a Responsible AI (RAI) methodology designed to guide the data collection with a set of metrics for an iterative in-depth analysis of the factors influencing the quality and reliability} of the generated data. We propose a granular set of measurements to inform on the internal reliability of a dataset and its external stability over time. We validate our approach across nine existing datasets and annotation tasks and four content modalities. This approach impacts the assessment of data robustness used for AI applied in the real world, where diversity of users and content is eminent. Furthermore, it deals with fairness and accountability aspects in data collection by providing systematic and transparent quality analysis for data collections.
△ Less
Submitted 27 September, 2023; v1 submitted 22 August, 2023;
originally announced August 2023.
-
Adversarial Nibbler: A Data-Centric Challenge for Improving the Safety of Text-to-Image Models
Authors:
Alicia Parrish,
Hannah Rose Kirk,
Jessica Quaye,
Charvi Rastogi,
Max Bartolo,
Oana Inel,
Juan Ciro,
Rafael Mosquera,
Addison Howard,
Will Cukierski,
D. Sculley,
Vijay Janapa Reddi,
Lora Aroyo
Abstract:
The generative AI revolution in recent years has been spurred by an expansion in compute power and data quantity, which together enable extensive pre-training of powerful text-to-image (T2I) models. With their greater capabilities to generate realistic and creative content, these T2I models like DALL-E, MidJourney, Imagen or Stable Diffusion are reaching ever wider audiences. Any unsafe behaviors…
▽ More
The generative AI revolution in recent years has been spurred by an expansion in compute power and data quantity, which together enable extensive pre-training of powerful text-to-image (T2I) models. With their greater capabilities to generate realistic and creative content, these T2I models like DALL-E, MidJourney, Imagen or Stable Diffusion are reaching ever wider audiences. Any unsafe behaviors inherited from pretraining on uncurated internet-scraped datasets thus have the potential to cause wide-reaching harm, for example, through generated images which are violent, sexually explicit, or contain biased and derogatory stereotypes. Despite this risk of harm, we lack systematic and structured evaluation datasets to scrutinize model behavior, especially adversarial attacks that bypass existing safety filters. A typical bottleneck in safety evaluation is achieving a wide coverage of different types of challenging examples in the evaluation set, i.e., identifying 'unknown unknowns' or long-tail problems. To address this need, we introduce the Adversarial Nibbler challenge. The goal of this challenge is to crowdsource a diverse set of failure modes and reward challenge participants for successfully finding safety vulnerabilities in current state-of-the-art T2I models. Ultimately, we aim to provide greater awareness of these issues and assist developers in improving the future safety and reliability of generative AI models. Adversarial Nibbler is a data-centric challenge, part of the DataPerf challenge suite, organized and supported by Kaggle and MLCommons.
△ Less
Submitted 22 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
-
Humans disagree with the IoU for measuring object detector localization error
Authors:
Ombretta Strafforello,
Vanathi Rajasekart,
Osman S. Kayhan,
Oana Inel,
Jan van Gemert
Abstract:
The localization quality of automatic object detectors is typically evaluated by the Intersection over Union (IoU) score. In this work, we show that humans have a different view on localization quality. To evaluate this, we conduct a survey with more than 70 participants. Results show that for localization errors with the exact same IoU score, humans might not consider that these errors are equal,…
▽ More
The localization quality of automatic object detectors is typically evaluated by the Intersection over Union (IoU) score. In this work, we show that humans have a different view on localization quality. To evaluate this, we conduct a survey with more than 70 participants. Results show that for localization errors with the exact same IoU score, humans might not consider that these errors are equal, and express a preference. Our work is the first to evaluate IoU with humans and makes it clear that relying on IoU scores alone to evaluate localization errors might not be sufficient.
△ Less
Submitted 28 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
-
DataPerf: Benchmarks for Data-Centric AI Development
Authors:
Mark Mazumder,
Colby Banbury,
Xiaozhe Yao,
Bojan Karlaš,
William Gaviria Rojas,
Sudnya Diamos,
Greg Diamos,
Lynn He,
Alicia Parrish,
Hannah Rose Kirk,
Jessica Quaye,
Charvi Rastogi,
Douwe Kiela,
David Jurado,
David Kanter,
Rafael Mosquera,
Juan Ciro,
Lora Aroyo,
Bilge Acun,
Lingjiao Chen,
Mehul Smriti Raje,
Max Bartolo,
Sabri Eyuboglu,
Amirata Ghorbani,
Emmett Goodman
, et al. (20 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Machine learning research has long focused on models rather than datasets, and prominent datasets are used for common ML tasks without regard to the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of the underlying problems. Neglecting the fundamental importance of data has given rise to inaccuracy, bias, and fragility in real-world applications, and research is hindered by saturation across existing datase…
▽ More
Machine learning research has long focused on models rather than datasets, and prominent datasets are used for common ML tasks without regard to the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of the underlying problems. Neglecting the fundamental importance of data has given rise to inaccuracy, bias, and fragility in real-world applications, and research is hindered by saturation across existing dataset benchmarks. In response, we present DataPerf, a community-led benchmark suite for evaluating ML datasets and data-centric algorithms. We aim to foster innovation in data-centric AI through competition, comparability, and reproducibility. We enable the ML community to iterate on datasets, instead of just architectures, and we provide an open, online platform with multiple rounds of challenges to support this iterative development. The first iteration of DataPerf contains five benchmarks covering a wide spectrum of data-centric techniques, tasks, and modalities in vision, speech, acquisition, debugging, and diffusion prompting, and we support hosting new contributed benchmarks from the community. The benchmarks, online evaluation platform, and baseline implementations are open source, and the MLCommons Association will maintain DataPerf to ensure long-term benefits to academia and industry.
△ Less
Submitted 13 October, 2023; v1 submitted 20 July, 2022;
originally announced July 2022.
-
Operationalizing Framing to Support Multiperspective Recommendations of Opinion Pieces
Authors:
Mats Mulder,
Oana Inel,
Jasper Oosterman,
Nava Tintarev
Abstract:
Diversity in personalized news recommender systems is often defined as dissimilarity, and based on topic diversity (e.g., corona versus farmers strike). Diversity in news media, however, is understood as multiperspectivity (e.g., different opinions on corona measures), and arguably a key responsibility of the press in a democratic society. While viewpoint diversity is often considered synonymous w…
▽ More
Diversity in personalized news recommender systems is often defined as dissimilarity, and based on topic diversity (e.g., corona versus farmers strike). Diversity in news media, however, is understood as multiperspectivity (e.g., different opinions on corona measures), and arguably a key responsibility of the press in a democratic society. While viewpoint diversity is often considered synonymous with source diversity in communication science domain, in this paper, we take a computational view. We operationalize the notion of framing, adopted from communication science. We apply this notion to a re-ranking of topic-relevant recommended lists, to form the basis of a novel viewpoint diversification method. Our offline evaluation indicates that the proposed method is capable of enhancing the viewpoint diversity of recommendation lists according to a diversity metric from literature. In an online study, on the Blendle platform, a Dutch news aggregator platform, with more than 2000 users, we found that users are willing to consume viewpoint diverse news recommendations. We also found that presentation characteristics significantly influence the reading behaviour of diverse recommendations. These results suggest that future research on presentation aspects of recommendations can be just as important as novel viewpoint diversification methods to truly achieve multiperspectivity in online news environments.
△ Less
Submitted 24 March, 2021; v1 submitted 15 January, 2021;
originally announced January 2021.
-
Eliciting User Preferences for Personalized Explanations for Video Summaries
Authors:
Oana Inel,
Nava Tintarev,
Lora Aroyo
Abstract:
Video summaries or highlights are a compelling alternative for exploring and contextualizing unprecedented amounts of video material. However, the summarization process is commonly automatic, non-transparent and potentially biased towards particular aspects depicted in the original video. Therefore, our aim is to help users like archivists or collection managers to quickly understand which summari…
▽ More
Video summaries or highlights are a compelling alternative for exploring and contextualizing unprecedented amounts of video material. However, the summarization process is commonly automatic, non-transparent and potentially biased towards particular aspects depicted in the original video. Therefore, our aim is to help users like archivists or collection managers to quickly understand which summaries are the most representative for an original video. In this paper, we present empirical results on the utility of different types of visual explanations to achieve transparency for end users on how representative video summaries are, with respect to the original video. We consider four types of video summary explanations, which use in different ways the concepts extracted from the original video subtitles and the video stream, and their prominence. The explanations are generated to meet target user preferences and express different dimensions of transparency: concept prominence, semantic coverage, distance and quantity of coverage. In two user studies we evaluate the utility of the visual explanations for achieving transparency for end users. Our results show that explanations representing all of the dimensions have the highest utility for transparency, and consequently, for understanding the representativeness of video summaries.
△ Less
Submitted 1 May, 2020;
originally announced May 2020.
-
A Survey of Crowdsourcing in Medical Image Analysis
Authors:
Silas Ørting,
Andrew Doyle,
Arno van Hilten,
Matthias Hirth,
Oana Inel,
Christopher R. Madan,
Panagiotis Mavridis,
Helen Spiers,
Veronika Cheplygina
Abstract:
Rapid advances in image processing capabilities have been seen across many domains, fostered by the application of machine learning algorithms to "big-data". However, within the realm of medical image analysis, advances have been curtailed, in part, due to the limited availability of large-scale, well-annotated datasets. One of the main reasons for this is the high cost often associated with produ…
▽ More
Rapid advances in image processing capabilities have been seen across many domains, fostered by the application of machine learning algorithms to "big-data". However, within the realm of medical image analysis, advances have been curtailed, in part, due to the limited availability of large-scale, well-annotated datasets. One of the main reasons for this is the high cost often associated with producing large amounts of high-quality meta-data. Recently, there has been growing interest in the application of crowdsourcing for this purpose; a technique that has proven effective for creating large-scale datasets across a range of disciplines, from computer vision to astrophysics. Despite the growing popularity of this approach, there has not yet been a comprehensive literature review to provide guidance to researchers considering using crowdsourcing methodologies in their own medical imaging analysis. In this survey, we review studies applying crowdsourcing to the analysis of medical images, published prior to July 2018. We identify common approaches, challenges and considerations, providing guidance of utility to researchers adopting this approach. Finally, we discuss future opportunities for development within this emerging domain.
△ Less
Submitted 4 September, 2019; v1 submitted 25 February, 2019;
originally announced February 2019.
-
Empirical Methodology for Crowdsourcing Ground Truth
Authors:
Anca Dumitrache,
Oana Inel,
Benjamin Timmermans,
Carlos Ortiz,
Robert-Jan Sips,
Lora Aroyo,
Chris Welty
Abstract:
The process of gathering ground truth data through human annotation is a major bottleneck in the use of information extraction methods for populating the Semantic Web. Crowdsourcing-based approaches are gaining popularity in the attempt to solve the issues related to volume of data and lack of annotators. Typically these practices use inter-annotator agreement as a measure of quality. However, in…
▽ More
The process of gathering ground truth data through human annotation is a major bottleneck in the use of information extraction methods for populating the Semantic Web. Crowdsourcing-based approaches are gaining popularity in the attempt to solve the issues related to volume of data and lack of annotators. Typically these practices use inter-annotator agreement as a measure of quality. However, in many domains, such as event detection, there is ambiguity in the data, as well as a multitude of perspectives of the information examples. We present an empirically derived methodology for efficiently gathering of ground truth data in a diverse set of use cases covering a variety of domains and annotation tasks. Central to our approach is the use of CrowdTruth metrics that capture inter-annotator disagreement. We show that measuring disagreement is essential for acquiring a high quality ground truth. We achieve this by comparing the quality of the data aggregated with CrowdTruth metrics with majority vote, over a set of diverse crowdsourcing tasks: Medical Relation Extraction, Twitter Event Identification, News Event Extraction and Sound Interpretation. We also show that an increased number of crowd workers leads to growth and stabilization in the quality of annotations, going against the usual practice of employing a small number of annotators.
△ Less
Submitted 24 September, 2018;
originally announced September 2018.
-
CrowdTruth 2.0: Quality Metrics for Crowdsourcing with Disagreement
Authors:
Anca Dumitrache,
Oana Inel,
Lora Aroyo,
Benjamin Timmermans,
Chris Welty
Abstract:
Typically crowdsourcing-based approaches to gather annotated data use inter-annotator agreement as a measure of quality. However, in many domains, there is ambiguity in the data, as well as a multitude of perspectives of the information examples. In this paper, we present ongoing work into the CrowdTruth metrics, that capture and interpret inter-annotator disagreement in crowdsourcing. The CrowdTr…
▽ More
Typically crowdsourcing-based approaches to gather annotated data use inter-annotator agreement as a measure of quality. However, in many domains, there is ambiguity in the data, as well as a multitude of perspectives of the information examples. In this paper, we present ongoing work into the CrowdTruth metrics, that capture and interpret inter-annotator disagreement in crowdsourcing. The CrowdTruth metrics model the inter-dependency between the three main components of a crowdsourcing system -- worker, input data, and annotation. The goal of the metrics is to capture the degree of ambiguity in each of these three components. The metrics are available online at https://github.com/CrowdTruth/CrowdTruth-core .
△ Less
Submitted 18 August, 2018;
originally announced August 2018.
