Quantitative knowledge retrieval from large language models

Large language models (LLMs) have been extensively studied for their abilities to generate convincing natural language sequences, however their utility for quantitative information retrieval is less well understood. In this paper we explore the feasibility of LLMs as a mechanism for quantitative knowledge retrieval to aid data analysis tasks such as elicitation of prior distributions for Bayesian models and imputation of missing data. We present a prompt engineering framework, treating an LLM as an interface to a latent space of scientific literature, comparing responses in different contexts and domains against more established approaches. Implications and challenges of using LLMs as 'experts' are discussed.

X Hacking: The Threat of Misguided AutoML

Explainable AI (XAI) and interpretable machine learning methods help to build trust in model predictions and derived insights, yet also present a perverse incentive for analysts to manipulate XAI metrics to support pre-specified conclusions. This paper introduces the concept of X-hacking, a form of p-hacking applied to XAI metrics such as Shap values. We show how an automated machine learning pipeline can be used to search for 'defensible' models that produce a desired explanation while maintaining superior predictive performance to a common baseline. We formulate the trade-off between explanation and accuracy as a multi-objective optimization problem and illustrate the feasibility and severity of X-hacking empirically on familiar real-world datasets. Finally, we suggest possible methods for detection and prevention, and discuss ethical implications for the credibility and reproducibility of XAI research.

Flexible Group Fairness Metrics for Survival Analysis

Algorithmic fairness is an increasingly important field concerned with detecting and mitigating biases in machine learning models. There has been a wealth of literature for algorithmic fairness in regression and classification however there has been little exploration of the field for survival analysis. Survival analysis is the prediction task in which one attempts to predict the probability of an event occurring over time. Survival predictions are particularly important in sensitive settings such as when utilising machine learning for diagnosis and prognosis of patients. In this paper we explore how to utilise existing survival metrics to measure bias with group fairness metrics. We explore this in an empirical experiment with 29 survival datasets and 8 measures. We find that measures of discrimination are able to capture bias well whereas there is less clarity with measures of calibration and scoring rules. We suggest further areas for research including prediction-based fairness metrics for distribution predictions.

$\mathcal{F}$-EBM: Energy Based Learning of Functional Data

Energy-Based Models (EBMs) have proven to be a highly effective approach for modelling densities on finite-dimensional spaces. Their ability to incorporate domain-specific choices and constraints into the structure of the model through composition make EBMs an appealing candidate for applications in physics, biology and computer vision and various other fields. In this work, we present a novel class of EBM which is able to learn distributions of functions (such as curves or surfaces) from functional samples evaluated at finitely many points. Two unique challenges arise in the functional context. Firstly, training data is often not evaluated along a fixed set of points. Secondly, steps must be taken to control the behaviour of the model between evaluation points, to mitigate overfitting. The proposed infinite-dimensional EBM employs a latent Gaussian process, which is weighted spectrally by an energy function parameterised with a neural network. The resulting EBM has the ability to utilize irregularly sampled training data and can output predictions at any resolution, providing an effective approach to up-scaling functional data. We demonstrate the efficacy of our proposed approach for modelling a range of datasets, including data collected from Standard and Poor's 500 (S\&P) and UK National grid.

Evaluation of survival distribution predictions with discrimination measures

In this paper we consider how to evaluate survival distribution predictions with measures of discrimination. This is a non-trivial problem as discrimination measures are the most commonly used in survival analysis and yet there is no clear method to derive a risk prediction from a distribution prediction. We survey methods proposed in literature and software and consider their respective advantages and disadvantages. Whilst distributions are frequently evaluated by discrimination measures, we find that the method for doing so is rarely described in the literature and often leads to unfair comparisons. We find that the most robust method of reducing a distribution to a risk is to sum over the predicted cumulative hazard. We recommend that machine learning survival analysis software implements clear transformations between distribution and risk predictions in order to allow more transparent and accessible model evaluation.

Bias Mitigated Learning from Differentially Private Synthetic Data: A Cautionary Tale

Increasing interest in privacy-preserving machine learning has led to new models for synthetic private data generation from undisclosed real data. However, mechanisms of privacy preservation introduce artifacts in the resulting synthetic data that have a significant impact on downstream tasks such as learning predictive models or inference. In particular, bias can affect all analyses as the synthetic data distribution is an inconsistent estimate of the real-data distribution. We propose several bias mitigation strategies using privatized likelihood ratios that have general applicability to differentially private synthetic data generative models. Through large-scale empirical evaluation, we show that bias mitigation provides simple and effective privacy-compliant augmentation for general applications of synthetic data. However, the work highlights that even after bias correction significant challenges remain on the usefulness of synthetic private data generators for tasks such as prediction and inference.

Foundations of Bayesian Learning from Synthetic Data

There is significant growth and interest in the use of synthetic data as an enabler for machine learning in environments where the release of real data is restricted due to privacy or availability constraints. Despite a large number of methods for synthetic data generation, there are comparatively few results on the statistical properties of models learnt on synthetic data, and fewer still for situations where a researcher wishes to augment real data with another party's synthesised data. We use a Bayesian paradigm to characterise the updating of model parameters when learning in these settings, demonstrating that caution should be taken when applying conventional learning algorithms without appropriate consideration of the synthetic data generating process and learning task. Recent results from general Bayesian updating support a novel and robust approach to Bayesian synthetic-learning founded on decision theory that outperforms standard approaches across repeated experiments on supervised learning and inference problems.

Debiasing classifiers: is reality at variance with expectation?

Many methods for debiasing classifiers have been proposed, but their effectiveness in practice remains unclear. We evaluate the performance of pre-processing and post-processing debiasers for improving fairness in random forest classifiers trained on a suite of data sets. Specifically, we study how these debiasers generalize with respect to both out-of-sample test error for computing fairness -- performance and fairness -- fairness trade-offs, and on the change in other fairness metrics that were not explicitly optimised. Our results demonstrate that out-of-sample performance on fairness and performance can vary substantially and unexpectedly. Moreover, the variance in estimation arises from class imbalances with respect to both the outcome and the protected classes. Our results highlight the importance of evaluating out-of-sample performance in practical usage.

A Recommendation and Risk Classification System for Connecting Rough Sleepers to Essential Outreach Services

Rough sleeping is a chronic problem faced by some of the most disadvantaged people in modern society. This paper describes work carried out in partnership with Homeless Link, a UK-based charity, in developing a data-driven approach to assess the quality of incoming alerts from members of the public aimed at connecting people sleeping rough on the streets with outreach service providers. Alerts are prioritised based on the predicted likelihood of successfully connecting with the rough sleeper, helping to address capacity limitations and to quickly, effectively, and equitably process all of the alerts that they receive. Initial evaluation concludes that our approach increases the rate at which rough sleepers are found following a referral by at least 15\% based on labelled data, implying a greater overall increase when the alerts with unknown outcomes are considered, and suggesting the benefit in a trial taking place over a longer period to assess the models in practice. The discussion and modelling process is done with careful considerations of ethics, transparency and explainability due to the sensitive nature of the data in this context and the vulnerability of the people that are affected.

Machine learning and AI research for Patient Benefit: 20 Critical Questions on Transparency, Replicability, Ethics and Effectiveness

Machine learning (ML), artificial intelligence (AI) and other modern statistical methods are providing new opportunities to operationalize previously untapped and rapidly growing sources of data for patient benefit. Whilst there is a lot of promising research currently being undertaken, the literature as a whole lacks: transparency; clear reporting to facilitate replicability; exploration for potential ethical concerns; and, clear demonstrations of effectiveness. There are many reasons for why these issues exist, but one of the most important that we provide a preliminary solution for here is the current lack of ML/AI- specific best practice guidance. Although there is no consensus on what best practice looks in this field, we believe that interdisciplinary groups pursuing research and impact projects in the ML/AI for health domain would benefit from answering a series of questions based on the important issues that exist when undertaking work of this nature. Here we present 20 questions that span the entire project life cycle, from inception, data analysis, and model evaluation, to implementation, as a means to facilitate project planning and post-hoc (structured) independent evaluation. By beginning to answer these questions in different settings, we can start to understand what constitutes a good answer, and we expect that the resulting discussion will be central to developing an international consensus framework for transparent, replicable, ethical and effective research in artificial intelligence (AI-TREE) for health.