Abstract:In our previous research, we provided a reasoning system (called LeSAC) based on argumentation theory to provide legal support to designers during the design process. Building on this, this paper explores how to provide designers with effective explanations for their legally relevant design decisions. We extend the previous system for providing explanations by specifying norms and the key legal or ethical principles for justifying actions in normative contexts. Considering that first-order logic has strong expressive power, in the current paper we adopt a first-order deontic logic system with deontic operators and preferences. We illustrate the advantages and necessity of introducing deontic logic and designing explanations under LeSAC by modelling two cases in the context of autonomous driving. In particular, this paper also discusses the requirements of the updated LeSAC to guarantee rationality, and proves that a well-defined LeSAC can satisfy the rationality postulate for rule-based argumentation frameworks. This ensures the system's ability to provide coherent, legally valid explanations for complex design decisions.
Abstract:We revisit the efficacy of several practical methods for approximate machine unlearning developed for large-scale deep learning. In addition to complying with data deletion requests, one often-cited potential application for unlearning methods is to remove the effects of training on poisoned data. We experimentally demonstrate that, while existing unlearning methods have been demonstrated to be effective in a number of evaluation settings (e.g., alleviating membership inference attacks), they fail to remove the effects of data poisoning, across a variety of types of poisoning attacks (indiscriminate, targeted, and a newly-introduced Gaussian poisoning attack) and models (image classifiers and LLMs); even when granted a relatively large compute budget. In order to precisely characterize unlearning efficacy, we introduce new evaluation metrics for unlearning based on data poisoning. Our results suggest that a broader perspective, including a wider variety of evaluations, is required to avoid a false sense of confidence in machine unlearning procedures for deep learning without provable guarantees. Moreover, while unlearning methods show some signs of being useful to efficiently remove poisoned datapoints without having to retrain, our work suggests that these methods are not yet "ready for prime time", and currently provide limited benefit over retraining.
Abstract:Machine unlearning provides viable solutions to revoke the effect of certain training data on pre-trained model parameters. Existing approaches provide unlearning recipes for classification and generative models. However, a category of important machine learning models, i.e., contrastive learning (CL) methods, is overlooked. In this paper, we fill this gap by first proposing the framework of Machine Unlearning for Contrastive learning (MUC) and adapting existing methods. Furthermore, we observe that several methods are mediocre unlearners and existing auditing tools may not be sufficient for data owners to validate the unlearning effects in contrastive learning. We thus propose a novel method called Alignment Calibration (AC) by explicitly considering the properties of contrastive learning and optimizing towards novel auditing metrics to easily verify unlearning. We empirically compare AC with baseline methods on SimCLR, MoCo and CLIP. We observe that AC addresses drawbacks of existing methods: (1) achieving state-of-the-art performance and approximating exact unlearning (retraining); (2) allowing data owners to clearly visualize the effect caused by unlearning through black-box auditing.
Abstract:Copyright infringement may occur when a generative model produces samples substantially similar to some copyrighted data that it had access to during the training phase. The notion of access usually refers to including copyrighted samples directly in the training dataset, which one may inspect to identify an infringement. We argue that such visual auditing largely overlooks a concealed copyright infringement, where one constructs a disguise that looks drastically different from the copyrighted sample yet still induces the effect of training Latent Diffusion Models on it. Such disguises only require indirect access to the copyrighted material and cannot be visually distinguished, thus easily circumventing the current auditing tools. In this paper, we provide a better understanding of such disguised copyright infringement by uncovering the disguises generation algorithm, the revelation of the disguises, and importantly, how to detect them to augment the existing toolbox. Additionally, we introduce a broader notion of acknowledgment for comprehending such indirect access.
Abstract:In neural network binarization, BinaryConnect (BC) and its variants are considered the standard. These methods apply the sign function in their forward pass and their respective gradients are backpropagated to update the weights. However, the derivative of the sign function is zero whenever defined, which consequently freezes training. Therefore, implementations of BC (e.g., BNN) usually replace the derivative of sign in the backward computation with identity or other approximate gradient alternatives. Although such practice works well empirically, it is largely a heuristic or ''training trick.'' We aim at shedding some light on these training tricks from the optimization perspective. Building from existing theory on ProxConnect (PC, a generalization of BC), we (1) equip PC with different forward-backward quantizers and obtain ProxConnect++ (PC++) that includes existing binarization techniques as special cases; (2) derive a principled way to synthesize forward-backward quantizers with automatic theoretical guarantees; (3) illustrate our theory by proposing an enhanced binarization algorithm BNN++; (4) conduct image classification experiments on CNNs and vision transformers, and empirically verify that BNN++ generally achieves competitive results on binarizing these models.
Abstract:Machine learning models have achieved great success in supervised learning tasks for end-to-end training, which requires a large amount of labeled data that is not always feasible. Recently, many practitioners have shifted to self-supervised learning methods that utilize cheap unlabeled data to learn a general feature extractor via pre-training, which can be further applied to personalized downstream tasks by simply training an additional linear layer with limited labeled data. However, such a process may also raise concerns regarding data poisoning attacks. For instance, indiscriminate data poisoning attacks, which aim to decrease model utility by injecting a small number of poisoned data into the training set, pose a security risk to machine learning models, but have only been studied for end-to-end supervised learning. In this paper, we extend the exploration of the threat of indiscriminate attacks on downstream tasks that apply pre-trained feature extractors. Specifically, we propose two types of attacks: (1) the input space attacks, where we modify existing attacks to directly craft poisoned data in the input space. However, due to the difficulty of optimization under constraints, we further propose (2) the feature targeted attacks, where we mitigate the challenge with three stages, firstly acquiring target parameters for the linear head; secondly finding poisoned features by treating the learned feature representations as a dataset; and thirdly inverting the poisoned features back to the input space. Our experiments examine such attacks in popular downstream tasks of fine-tuning on the same dataset and transfer learning that considers domain adaptation. Empirical results reveal that transfer learning is more vulnerable to our attacks. Additionally, input space attacks are a strong threat if no countermeasures are posed, but are otherwise weaker than feature targeted attacks.
Abstract:In self-supervised contrastive learning, a widely-adopted objective function is InfoNCE, which uses the heuristic cosine similarity for the representation comparison, and is closely related to maximizing the Kullback-Leibler (KL)-based mutual information. In this paper, we aim at answering two intriguing questions: (1) Can we go beyond the KL-based objective? (2) Besides the popular cosine similarity, can we design a better similarity function? We provide answers to both questions by generalizing the KL-based mutual information to the $f$-Mutual Information in Contrastive Learning ($f$-MICL) using the $f$-divergences. To answer the first question, we provide a wide range of $f$-MICL objectives which share the nice properties of InfoNCE (e.g., alignment and uniformity), and meanwhile result in similar or even superior performance. For the second question, assuming that the joint feature distribution is proportional to the Gaussian kernel, we derive an $f$-Gaussian similarity with better interpretability and empirical performance. Finally, we identify close relationships between the $f$-MICL objective and several popular InfoNCE-based objectives. Using benchmark tasks from both vision and natural language, we empirically evaluate $f$-MICL with different $f$-divergences on various architectures (SimCLR, MoCo, and MoCo v3) and datasets. We observe that $f$-MICL generally outperforms the benchmarks and the best-performing $f$-divergence is task and dataset dependent.
Abstract:Indiscriminate data poisoning attacks aim to decrease a model's test accuracy by injecting a small amount of corrupted training data. Despite significant interest, existing attacks remain relatively ineffective against modern machine learning (ML) architectures. In this work, we introduce the notion of model poisonability as a technical tool to explore the intrinsic limits of data poisoning attacks. We derive an easily computable threshold to establish and quantify a surprising phase transition phenomenon among popular ML models: data poisoning attacks become effective only when the poisoning ratio exceeds our threshold. Building on existing parameter corruption attacks and refining the Gradient Canceling attack, we perform extensive experiments to confirm our theoretical findings, test the predictability of our transition threshold, and significantly improve existing data poisoning baselines over a range of datasets and models. Our work highlights the critical role played by the poisoning ratio, and sheds new insights on existing empirical results, attacks and mitigation strategies in data poisoning.
Abstract:Ontology is a popular method for knowledge representation in different domains, including the legal domain, and description logics (DL) is commonly used as its description language. To handle reasoning based on inconsistent DL-based legal ontologies, the current paper presents a structured argumentation framework particularly for reasoning in legal contexts on the basis of ASPIC+, and translates the legal ontology into formulas and rules of an argumentation theory. With a particular focus on the design of autonomous vehicles from the perspective of legal AI, we show that using this combined theory of formal argumentation and DL-based legal ontology, acceptable assertions can be obtained based on inconsistent ontologies, and the traditional reasoning tasks of DL ontologies can also be accomplished. In addition, a formal definition of explanations for the result of reasoning is presented.
Abstract:Data poisoning attacks, in which a malicious adversary aims to influence a model by injecting "poisoned" data into the training process, have attracted significant recent attention. In this work, we take a closer look at existing poisoning attacks and connect them with old and new algorithms for solving sequential Stackelberg games. By choosing an appropriate loss function for the attacker and optimizing with algorithms that exploit second-order information, we design poisoning attacks that are effective on neural networks. We present efficient implementations that exploit modern auto-differentiation packages and allow simultaneous and coordinated generation of tens of thousands of poisoned points, in contrast to existing methods that generate poisoned points one by one. We further perform extensive experiments that empirically explore the effect of data poisoning attacks on deep neural networks.