pwc-archive/papers-with-abstracts huggingface dataset:
Status and Future Prospects of the Standardization Framework Industry 4.0: A European Perspective
Authors: Olga Meyer, Marvin Boell, Christoph Legat
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00

The rapid development of Industry 4.0 technologies requires robust and comprehensive standardization to ensure interoperability, safety and efficiency in the Industry of the Future. This paper examines the fundamental role and functionality of standardization, with a particular focus on its importance in Europe's regulatory framework. Based on this, selected topics in context of standardization activities in context intelligent manufacturing and digital twins are highlighted and, by that, an overview of the Industry 4.0 standards framework is provided. This paper serves both as an informative guide to the existing standards in Industry 4.0 with respect to Artificial Intelligence and Digital Twins, and as a call to action for increased cooperation between standardization bodies and the research community. By fostering such collaboration, we aim to facilitate the continued development and implementation of standards that will drive innovation and progress in the manufacturing sector.
Specification languages for computational laws versus basic legal principles
Authors: Petia Guintchev, Joost J. Joosten, Sofia Santiago Fernández, Eric Sancho Adamson, Aleix Solé Sánchez, Marta Soria Heredia
Date: 2025-03-12 00:00:00

We speak of a \textit{computational law} when that law is intended to be enforced by software through an automated decision-making process. As digital technologies evolve to offer more solutions for public administrations, we see an ever-increasing number of computational laws. Traditionally, law is written in natural language. Computational laws, however, suffer various complications when written in natural language, such as underspecification and ambiguity which lead to a diversity of possible interpretations to be made by the coder. These could potentially result into an uneven application of the law. Thus, resorting to formal languages to write computational laws is tempting. However, writing laws in a formal language leads to further complications, for example, incomprehensibility for non-experts, lack of explicit motivation of the decisions made, or difficulties in retrieving the data leading to the outcome. In this paper, we investigate how certain legal principles fare in both scenarios: computational law written in natural language or written in formal language. We use a running example from the European Union's road transport regulation to showcase the tensions arising, and the benefits from each language.
Generating Robot Constitutions & Benchmarks for Semantic Safety
Authors: Pierre Sermanet, Anirudha Majumdar, Alex Irpan, Dmitry Kalashnikov, Vikas Sindhwani
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00
Tasks: Collision Avoidance, Image Generation, Scene Understanding, Specificity

Until recently, robotics safety research was predominantly about collision avoidance and hazard reduction in the immediate vicinity of a robot. Since the advent of large vision and language models (VLMs), robots are now also capable of higher-level semantic scene understanding and natural language interactions with humans. Despite their known vulnerabilities (e.g. hallucinations or jail-breaking), VLMs are being handed control of robots capable of physical contact with the real world. This can lead to dangerous behaviors, making semantic safety for robots a matter of immediate concern. Our contributions in this paper are two fold: first, to address these emerging risks, we release the ASIMOV Benchmark, a large-scale and comprehensive collection of datasets for evaluating and improving semantic safety of foundation models serving as robot brains. Our data generation recipe is highly scalable: by leveraging text and image generation techniques, we generate undesirable situations from real-world visual scenes and human injury reports from hospitals. Secondly, we develop a framework to automatically generate robot constitutions from real-world data to steer a robot's behavior using Constitutional AI mechanisms. We propose a novel auto-amending process that is able to introduce nuances in written rules of behavior; this can lead to increased alignment with human preferences on behavior desirability and safety. We explore trade-offs between generality and specificity across a diverse set of constitutions of different lengths, and demonstrate that a robot is able to effectively reject unconstitutional actions. We measure a top alignment rate of 84.3% on the ASIMOV Benchmark using generated constitutions, outperforming no-constitution baselines and human-written constitutions. Data is available at asimov-benchmark.github.io
BiasEdit: Debiasing Stereotyped Language Models via Model Editing
Authors: Xin Xu, Wei Xu, Ningyu Zhang, Julian McAuley
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00
Tasks: counterfactual, Language Modeling, Language Modelling, Model Editing

Previous studies have established that language models manifest stereotyped biases. Existing debiasing strategies, such as retraining a model with counterfactual data, representation projection, and prompting often fail to efficiently eliminate bias or directly alter the models' biased internal representations. To address these issues, we propose BiasEdit, an efficient model editing method to remove stereotypical bias from language models through lightweight networks that act as editors to generate parameter updates. BiasEdit employs a debiasing loss guiding editor networks to conduct local edits on partial parameters of a language model for debiasing while preserving the language modeling abilities during editing through a retention loss. Experiments on StereoSet and Crows-Pairs demonstrate the effectiveness, efficiency, and robustness of BiasEdit in eliminating bias compared to tangental debiasing baselines and little to no impact on the language models' general capabilities. In addition, we conduct bias tracing to probe bias in various modules and explore bias editing impacts on different components of language models.
When Discourse Stalls: Moving Past Five Semantic Stopsigns about Generative AI in Design Research
Authors: Willem van der Maden, Vera van der Burg, Brett A. Halperin, Petra Jääskeläinen, Joseph Lindley, Derek Lomas, Timothy Merritt
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00

This essay examines how Generative AI (GenAI) is rapidly transforming design practices and how discourse often falls into over-simplified narratives that impede meaningful research and practical progress. We identify and deconstruct five prevalent "semantic stopsigns" -- reductive framings about GenAI in design that halt deeper inquiry and limit productive engagement. Reflecting upon two expert workshops at ACM conferences and semi-structured interviews with design practitioners, we analyze how these stopsigns manifest in research and practice. Our analysis develops mid-level knowledge that bridges theoretical discourse and practical implementation, helping designers and researchers interrogate common assumptions about GenAI in their own contexts. By recasting these stopsigns into more nuanced frameworks, we provide the design research community with practical approaches for thinking about and working with these emerging technologies.
Fact-checking with Generative AI: A Systematic Cross-Topic Examination of LLMs Capacity to Detect Veracity of Political Information
Authors: Elizaveta Kuznetsova, Ilaria Vitulano, Mykola Makhortykh, Martha Stolze, Tomas Nagy, Victoria Vziatysheva
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00
Tasks: Fact Checking

The purpose of this study is to assess how large language models (LLMs) can be used for fact-checking and contribute to the broader debate on the use of automated means for veracity identification. To achieve this purpose, we use AI auditing methodology that systematically evaluates performance of five LLMs (ChatGPT 4, Llama 3 (70B), Llama 3.1 (405B), Claude 3.5 Sonnet, and Google Gemini) using prompts regarding a large set of statements fact-checked by professional journalists (16,513). Specifically, we use topic modeling and regression analysis to investigate which factors (e.g. topic of the prompt or the LLM type) affect evaluations of true, false, and mixed statements. Our findings reveal that while ChatGPT 4 and Google Gemini achieved higher accuracy than other models, overall performance across models remains modest. Notably, the results indicate that models are better at identifying false statements, especially on sensitive topics such as COVID-19, American political controversies, and social issues, suggesting possible guardrails that may enhance accuracy on these topics. The major implication of our findings is that there are significant challenges for using LLMs for factchecking, including significant variation in performance across different LLMs and unequal quality of outputs for specific topics which can be attributed to deficits of training data. Our research highlights the potential and limitations of LLMs in political fact-checking, suggesting potential avenues for further improvements in guardrails as well as fine-tuning.
Predicting and Understanding College Student Mental Health with Interpretable Machine Learning
Authors: Meghna Roy Chowdhury, Wei Xuan, Shreyas Sen, Yixue Zhao, Yi Ding
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00
Tasks: Interpretable Machine Learning

Mental health issues among college students have reached critical levels, significantly impacting academic performance and overall wellbeing. Predicting and understanding mental health status among college students is challenging due to three main factors: the necessity for large-scale longitudinal datasets, the prevalence of black-box machine learning models lacking transparency, and the tendency of existing approaches to provide aggregated insights at the population level rather than individualized understanding. To tackle these challenges, this paper presents I-HOPE, the first Interpretable Hierarchical mOdel for Personalized mEntal health prediction. I-HOPE is a two-stage hierarchical model that connects raw behavioral features to mental health status through five defined behavioral categories as interaction labels. We evaluate I-HOPE on the College Experience Study, the longest longitudinal mobile sensing dataset. This dataset spans five years and captures data from both pre-pandemic periods and the COVID-19 pandemic. I-HOPE achieves a prediction accuracy of 91%, significantly surpassing the 60-70% accuracy of baseline methods. In addition, I-HOPE distills complex patterns into interpretable and individualized insights, enabling the future development of tailored interventions and improving mental health support. The code is available at https://github.com/roycmeghna/I-HOPE.
Counterfactual Explanations for Model Ensembles Using Entropic Risk Measures
Authors: Erfaun Noorani, Pasan Dissanayake, Faisal Hamman, Sanghamitra Dutta
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00
Tasks: counterfactual, Counterfactual Explanation, valid

Counterfactual explanations indicate the smallest change in input that can translate to a different outcome for a machine learning model. Counterfactuals have generated immense interest in high-stakes applications such as finance, education, hiring, etc. In several use-cases, the decision-making process often relies on an ensemble of models rather than just one. Despite significant research on counterfactuals for one model, the problem of generating a single counterfactual explanation for an ensemble of models has received limited interest. Each individual model might lead to a different counterfactual, whereas trying to find a counterfactual accepted by all models might significantly increase cost (effort). We propose a novel strategy to find the counterfactual for an ensemble of models using the perspective of entropic risk measure. Entropic risk is a convex risk measure that satisfies several desirable properties. We incorporate our proposed risk measure into a novel constrained optimization to generate counterfactuals for ensembles that stay valid for several models. The main significance of our measure is that it provides a knob that allows for the generation of counterfactuals that stay valid under an adjustable fraction of the models. We also show that a limiting case of our entropic-risk-based strategy yields a counterfactual valid for all models in the ensemble (worst-case min-max approach). We study the trade-off between the cost (effort) for the counterfactual and its validity for an ensemble by varying degrees of risk aversion, as determined by our risk parameter knob. We validate our performance on real-world datasets.
The Algorithmic State Architecture (ASA): An Integrated Framework for AI-Enabled Government
Authors: Zeynep Engin, Jon Crowcroft, David Hand, Philip Treleaven
Date: 2025-03-11 00:00:00
Tasks: Decision Making

As artificial intelligence transforms public sector operations, governments struggle to integrate technological innovations into coherent systems for effective service delivery. This paper introduces the Algorithmic State Architecture (ASA), a novel four-layer framework conceptualising how Digital Public Infrastructure, Data-for-Policy, Algorithmic Government/Governance, and GovTech interact as an integrated system in AI-enabled states. Unlike approaches that treat these as parallel developments, ASA positions them as interdependent layers with specific enabling relationships and feedback mechanisms. Through comparative analysis of implementations in Estonia, Singapore, India, and the UK, we demonstrate how foundational digital infrastructure enables systematic data collection, which powers algorithmic decision-making processes, ultimately manifesting in user-facing services. Our analysis reveals that successful implementations require balanced development across all layers, with particular attention to integration mechanisms between them. The framework contributes to both theory and practice by bridging previously disconnected domains of digital government research, identifying critical dependencies that influence implementation success, and providing a structured approach for analysing the maturity and development pathways of AI-enabled government systems.
AI for Just Work: Constructing Diverse Imaginations of AI beyond "Replacing Humans"
Authors: Weina Jin, Nicholas Vincent, Ghassan Hamarneh
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00
Tasks: Image Generation

"why" we develop AI. Lacking critical reflections on the general visions and purposes of AI may make the community vulnerable to manipulation. In this position paper, we explore the "why" question of AI. We denote answers to the "why" question the imaginations of AI, which depict our general visions, frames, and mindsets for the prospects of AI. We identify that the prevailing vision in the AI community is largely a monoculture that emphasizes objectives such as replacing humans and improving productivity. Our critical examination of this mainstream imagination highlights its underpinning and potentially unjust assumptions. We then call to diversify our collective imaginations of AI, embedding ethical assumptions from the outset in the imaginations of AI. To facilitate the community's pursuit of diverse imaginations, we demonstrate one process for constructing a new imagination of "AI for just work," and showcase its application in the medical image synthesis task to make it more ethical. We hope this work will help the AI community to open critical dialogues with civil society on the visions and purposes of AI, and inspire more technical works and advocacy in pursuit of diverse and ethical imaginations to restore the value of AI for the public good.
Towards Large Language Models that Benefit for All: Benchmarking Group Fairness in Reward Models
Authors: Kefan Song, Jin Yao, Runnan Jiang, Rohan Chandra, Shangtong Zhang
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00
Tasks: All, Benchmarking, Fairness

As Large Language Models (LLMs) become increasingly powerful and accessible to human users, ensuring fairness across diverse demographic groups, i.e., group fairness, is a critical ethical concern. However, current fairness and bias research in LLMs is limited in two aspects. First, compared to traditional group fairness in machine learning classification, it requires that the non-sensitive attributes, in this case, the prompt questions, be the same across different groups. In many practical scenarios, different groups, however, may prefer different prompt questions and this requirement becomes impractical. Second, it evaluates group fairness only for the LLM's final output without identifying the source of possible bias. Namely, the bias in LLM's output can result from both the pretraining and the finetuning. For finetuning, the bias can result from both the RLHF procedure and the learned reward model. Arguably, evaluating the group fairness of each component in the LLM pipeline could help develop better methods to mitigate the possible bias. Recognizing those two limitations, this work benchmarks the group fairness of learned reward models. By using expert-written text from arXiv, we are able to benchmark the group fairness of reward models without requiring the same prompt questions across different demographic groups. Surprisingly, our results demonstrate that all the evaluated reward models (e.g., Nemotron-4-340B-Reward, ArmoRM-Llama3-8B-v0.1, and GRM-llama3-8B-sftreg) exhibit statistically significant group unfairness. We also observed that top-performing reward models (w.r.t. canonical performance metrics) tend to demonstrate better group fairness.
Sublinear Algorithms for Wasserstein and Total Variation Distances: Applications to Fairness and Privacy Auditing
Authors: Debabrota Basu, Debarshi Chanda
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00
Tasks: Fairness, Federated Learning

Resource-efficiently computing representations of probability distributions and the distances between them while only having access to the samples is a fundamental and useful problem across mathematical sciences. In this paper, we propose a generic framework to learn the probability and cumulative distribution functions (PDFs and CDFs) of a sub-Weibull, i.e. almost any light- or heavy-tailed, distribution while the samples from it arrive in a stream. The idea is to reduce these problems into estimating the frequency of an \textit{appropriately chosen subset} of the support of a \textit{properly discretised distribution}. We leverage this reduction to compute mergeable summaries of distributions from the stream of samples while requiring only sublinear space relative to the number of observed samples. This allows us to estimate Wasserstein and Total Variation (TV) distances between any two distributions while samples arrive in streams and from multiple sources. Our algorithms significantly improves on the existing methods for distance estimation incurring super-linear time and linear space complexities, and further extend the mergeable summaries framework to continuous distributions with possibly infinite support. Our results are tight with respect to the existing lower bounds for bounded discrete distributions. In addition, we leverage our proposed estimators of Wasserstein and TV distances to tightly audit the fairness and privacy of algorithms. We empirically demonstrate the efficiency of proposed algorithms across synthetic and real-world datasets.
Artificial Intelligence in Deliberation: The AI Penalty and the Emergence of a New Deliberative Divide
Authors: Andreas Jungherr, Adrian Rauchfleisch
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00
Tasks: Fact Checking

Digital deliberation has expanded democratic participation, yet challenges remain. This includes processing information at scale, moderating discussions, fact-checking, or attracting people to participate. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) offer potential solutions, but public perceptions of AI's role in deliberation remain underexplored. Beyond efficiency, democratic deliberation is about voice and recognition. If AI is integrated into deliberation, public trust, acceptance, and willingness to participate may be affected. We conducted a preregistered survey experiment with a representative sample in Germany (n=1850) to examine how information about AI-enabled deliberation influences willingness to participate and perceptions of deliberative quality. Respondents were randomly assigned to treatments that provided them information about deliberative tasks facilitated by either AI or humans. Our findings reveal a significant AI-penalty. Participants were less willing to engage in AI-facilitated deliberation and rated its quality lower than human-led formats. These effects were moderated by individual predispositions. Perceptions of AI's societal benefits and anthropomorphization of AI showed positive interaction effects on people's interest to participate in AI-enabled deliberative formats and positive quality assessments, while AI risk assessments showed negative interactions with information about AI-enabled deliberation. These results suggest AI-enabled deliberation faces substantial public skepticism, potentially even introducing a new deliberative divide. Unlike traditional participation gaps based on education or demographics, this divide is shaped by attitudes toward AI. As democratic engagement increasingly moves online, ensuring AI's role in deliberation does not discourage participation or deepen inequalities will be a key challenge for future research and policy.
Ways of Seeing, and Selling, AI Art
Authors: Imke van Heerden
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00

In early 2025, Augmented Intelligence - Christie's first AI art auction - drew criticism for showcasing a controversial genre. Amid wider legal uncertainty, artists voiced concerns over data mining practices, notably with respect to copyright. The backlash could be viewed as a microcosm of AI's contested position in the creative economy. Touching on the auction's presentation, reception, and results, this paper explores how, among social dissonance, machine learning finds its place in the artworld. Foregrounding responsible innovation, the paper provides a balanced perspective that champions creators' rights and brings nuance to this polarised debate. With a focus on exhibition design, it centres framing, which refers to the way a piece is presented to influence consumer perception. Context plays a central role in shaping our understanding of how good, valuable, and even ethical an artwork is. In this regard, Augmented Intelligence situates AI art within a surprisingly traditional framework, leveraging hallmarks of "high art" to establish the genre's cultural credibility. Generative AI has a clear economic dimension, converging questions of artistic merit with those of monetary worth. Scholarship on ways of seeing, or framing, could substantively inform the interpretation and evaluation of creative outputs, including assessments of their aesthetic and commercial value.
The Janus Face of Innovation: Global Disparities and Divergent Options
Authors: Nihat Mugurtay
Date: 2025-03-10 00:00:00

This article examines how unequal access to AI innovation creates systemic challenges for developing countries. Differential access to AI innovation results from the acute competition between domestic and global actors. While developing nations contribute significantly to AI development through data annotation labor, they face limited access to advanced AI technologies and are increasingly caught between divergent regulatory approaches from democratic and authoritarian tendencies. This brief paper analyzes how more affordable AI engagement and Western countries' development cooperation present developing nations with a complex choice between accessibility and governance standards. I argue this challenge entails new institutional mechanisms for technology transfer and regulatory cooperation, while carefully balancing universal standards with local needs. In turn, good practices could help developing countries close the deepening gap of global technological divides, while ensuring responsible AI development in developing countries.