arXiv subjects

Jan Simson

Publications and source records attributed to Jan Simson.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Evaluating Intellectual Property Guardrails of Generative Image Models: A Technical Report

Generative image models are capable of producing images that bear a strong resemblance to, or replicate, recognizable intellectual property (IP). In this technical report, we present a benchmark and automated evaluation pipeline to test for evidence of IP guardrails in generative image models along with the propensity for these models to generate images with recognizable IP. The IP categories we tested include fictional characters, celebrity likeness, and commercial logos and do not encompass the full range of IP which may be implicated by image generation models. We evaluated fourteen widely used text-to-image models, including three self-hosted open weights models and eleven private models. While all of the private models were observed to refuse generations at some level due to IP guardrails, the frequency of generation refusals varied substantially among models. The refusal rates also varied considerably across the different IP categories tested. Commercial logos were refused least frequently and were successfully generated at the highest rate, on average. Though the rate varies, all models tested readily generated images containing recognizable IP as of March 2026.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

"Taking Stock at FAccT": Using Participatory Design to Co-Create a Vision for the Fairness, Accountability and Transparency Community

As a relatively new forum, ACM FAccT has become a key space for activists and scholars to critically examine emerging AI and ML technologies. It brings together academics, civil society members, and government representatives from diverse fields to explore the broader societal impacts of both deployed and proposed technologies. We report a large-scale participatory design (PD) process for reflexive conference governance, which combined an in-person CRAFT session, an asynchronous Polis poll and the synthesis of a governance-facing report for the FAccT leadership. Participants shaped the substantive agenda by authoring seed statements, adding new statements and making patterns of agreement, disagreement and uncertainty made visible through voting.Our endeavors represent one of the the first instances of applying PD to a venue that critically interrogates the societal impacts of AI, fostering a niche in which critical scholars are free to voice their concerns. Finally, this work advances large-scale PD theory by providing an effective case study of a co-design paradigm that can readily scale temporally and epistemologically.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Bias Begins with Data: The FairGround Corpus for Robust and Reproducible Research on Algorithmic Fairness

As machine learning (ML) systems are increasingly adopted in high-stakes decision-making domains, ensuring fairness in their outputs has become a central challenge. At the core of fair ML research are the datasets used to investigate bias and develop mitigation strategies. Yet, much of the existing work relies on a narrow selection of datasets--often arbitrarily chosen, inconsistently processed, and lacking in diversity--undermining the generalizability and reproducibility of results. To address these limitations, we present FairGround: a unified framework, data corpus, and Python package aimed at advancing reproducible research and critical data studies in fair ML classification. FairGround currently comprises 44 tabular datasets, each annotated with rich fairness-relevant metadata. Our accompanying Python package standardizes dataset loading, preprocessing, transformation, and splitting, streamlining experimental workflows. By providing a diverse and well-documented dataset corpus along with robust tooling, FairGround enables the development of fairer, more reliable, and more reproducible ML models. All resources are publicly available to support open and collaborative research.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Decoupling Data and Tooling in Interactive Visualization

Interactive data visualization is a major part of modern exploratory data analysis, with web-based technologies enabling a rich ecosystem of both specialized and general tools. However, current visualization tools often lack support for transformation or wrangling of data and are forced to re-implement their own solutions to load and ingest data. This redundancy creates substantial development overhead for tool creators, steeper learning curves for users who must master different data handling interfaces across tools and a degraded user experience as data handling is usually seen as an after-thought. We propose a modular approach that separates data wrangling and loading capabilities from visualization components. This architecture allows visualization tools to concentrate on their core strengths while providing the opportunity to develop a unified, powerful interface for data handling. An additional benefit of this approach is that it allows for multiple tools to exist and be used side by side. We demonstrate the feasibility of this approach by building an early prototype using web technologies to encapsulate visualization tools and manage data flow between them. We discuss future research directions, including downstream integrations with other tooling, such as IDEs, literate programming notebooks and applications, as well as incorporation of new technologies for efficient data transformations. We seek input from the community to better understand the requirements towards this approach.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2024

Cracking the Code: Evaluating Zero-Shot Prompting Methods for Providing Programming Feedback

Despite the growing use of large language models (LLMs) for providing feedback, limited research has explored how to achieve high-quality feedback. This case study introduces an evaluation framework to assess different zero-shot prompt engineering methods. We varied the prompts systematically and analyzed the provided feedback on programming errors in R. The results suggest that prompts suggesting a stepwise procedure increase the precision, while omitting explicit specifications about which provided data to analyze improves error identification.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2024

Lazy Data Practices Harm Fairness Research

Data practices shape research and practice on fairness in machine learning (fair ML). Critical data studies offer important reflections and critiques for the responsible advancement of the field by highlighting shortcomings and proposing recommendations for improvement. In this work, we present a comprehensive analysis of fair ML datasets, demonstrating how unreflective yet common practices hinder the reach and reliability of algorithmic fairness findings. We systematically study protected information encoded in tabular datasets and their usage in 280 experiments across 142 publications. Our analyses identify three main areas of concern: (1) a \textbf{lack of representation for certain protected attributes} in both data and evaluations; (2) the widespread \textbf{exclusion of minorities} during data preprocessing; and (3) \textbf{opaque data processing} threatening the generalization of fairness research. By conducting exemplary analyses on the utilization of prominent datasets, we demonstrate how unreflective data decisions disproportionately affect minority groups, fairness metrics, and resultant model comparisons. Additionally, we identify supplementary factors such as limitations in publicly available data, privacy considerations, and a general lack of awareness, which exacerbate these challenges. To address these issues, we propose a set of recommendations for data usage in fairness research centered on transparency and responsible inclusion. This study underscores the need for a critical reevaluation of data practices in fair ML and offers directions to improve both the sourcing and usage of datasets.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

One Model Many Scores: Using Multiverse Analysis to Prevent Fairness Hacking and Evaluate the Influence of Model Design Decisions

A vast number of systems across the world use algorithmic decision making (ADM) to (partially) automate decisions that have previously been made by humans. The downstream effects of ADM systems critically depend on the decisions made during a systems' design, implementation, and evaluation, as biases in data can be mitigated or reinforced along the modeling pipeline. Many of these decisions are made implicitly, without knowing exactly how they will influence the final system. To study this issue, we draw on insights from the field of psychology and introduce the method of multiverse analysis for algorithmic fairness. In our proposed method, we turn implicit decisions during design and evaluation into explicit ones and demonstrate their fairness implications. By combining decisions, we create a grid of all possible "universes" of decision combinations. For each of these universes, we compute metrics of fairness and performance. Using the resulting dataset, one can investigate the variability and robustness of fairness scores and see how and which decisions impact fairness. We demonstrate how multiverse analyses can be used to better understand fairness implications of design and evaluation decisions using an exemplary case study of predicting public health care coverage for vulnerable populations. Our results highlight how decisions regarding the evaluation of a system can lead to vastly different fairness metrics for the same model. This is problematic, as a nefarious actor could optimise or "hack" a fairness metric to portray a discriminating model as fair merely by changing how it is evaluated. We illustrate how a multiverse analysis can help to address this issue.

stat.ML↗