BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Erick Galinkin

Erick Galinkin contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Machine Learningcs.CYArtificial IntelligenceCryptography and SecurityComputer Science and Game Theoryeess.SYHuman-Computer InteractionInformation Theorymath.ITSystems and Control

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
6works
0followers
10topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

6 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Robustness and Usefulness in AI Explanation Methods

Explainability in machine learning has become incredibly important as machine learning-powered systems become ubiquitous and both regulation and public sentiment begin to demand an understanding of how these systems make decisions. As a result, a number of explanation methods have begun to receive widespread adoption. This work summarizes, compares, and contrasts three popular explanation methods: LIME, SmoothGrad, and SHAP. We evaluate these methods with respect to: robustness, in the sense of sample complexity and stability; understandability, in the sense that provided explanations are consistent with user expectations; and usability, in the sense that the explanations allow for the model to be modified based on the output. This work concludes that current explanation methods are insufficient; that putting faith in and adopting these methods may actually be worse than simply not using them.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Towards a Responsible AI Development Lifecycle: Lessons From Information Security

Legislation and public sentiment throughout the world have promoted fairness metrics, explainability, and interpretability as prescriptions for the responsible development of ethical artificial intelligence systems. Despite the importance of these three pillars in the foundation of the field, they can be challenging to operationalize and attempts to solve the problems in production environments often feel Sisyphean. This difficulty stems from a number of factors: fairness metrics are computationally difficult to incorporate into training and rarely alleviate all of the harms perpetrated by these systems. Interpretability and explainability can be gamed to appear fair, may inadvertently reduce the privacy of personal information contained in training data, and increase user confidence in predictions -- even when the explanations are wrong. In this work, we propose a framework for responsibly developing artificial intelligence systems by incorporating lessons from the field of information security and the secure development lifecycle to overcome challenges associated with protecting users in adversarial settings. In particular, we propose leveraging the concepts of threat modeling, design review, penetration testing, and incident response in the context of developing AI systems as ways to resolve shortcomings in the aforementioned methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Winning the Ransomware Lottery: A Game-Theoretic Model for Mitigating Ransomware Attacks

Ransomware is a growing threat to individuals and enterprises alike, constituting a major factor in cyber insurance and in the security planning of every organization. Although the game theoretic lens often frames the game as a competition between equals -- a profit maximizing attacker and a loss minimizing defender -- the reality of many situations is that ransomware organizations are not playing a non-cooperative game, they are playing a lottery. The wanton behavior of attackers creates a situation where many victims are hit more than once by ransomware operators, sometimes even by the same group. If defenders wish to combat malware, they must then seek to remove the incentives of it. In this work, we construct an expected value model based on data from actual ransomware attacks and identify three variables: the value of payments, the cost of an attack, and the probability of payment. Using this model, we consider the potential to manipulate these variables to reduce the profit motive associated with ransomware attack. Based on the model, we present mitigations to encourage an environment that is hostile to ransomware operators. In particular, we find that off-site backups and government incentives for their adoption are the most fruitful avenue for combating ransomware.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Green Lighting ML: Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability of Machine Learning Systems in Deployment

Security and ethics are both core to ensuring that a machine learning system can be trusted. In production machine learning, there is generally a hand-off from those who build a model to those who deploy a model. In this hand-off, the engineers responsible for model deployment are often not privy to the details of the model and thus, the potential vulnerabilities associated with its usage, exposure, or compromise. Techniques such as model theft, model inversion, or model misuse may not be considered in model deployment, and so it is incumbent upon data scientists and machine learning engineers to understand these potential risks so they can communicate them to the engineers deploying and hosting their models. This is an open problem in the machine learning community and in order to help alleviate this issue, automated systems for validating privacy and security of models need to be developed, which will help to lower the burden of implementing these hand-offs and increasing the ubiquity of their adoption.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Malicious Network Traffic Detection via Deep Learning: An Information Theoretic View

The attention that deep learning has garnered from the academic community and industry continues to grow year over year, and it has been said that we are in a new golden age of artificial intelligence research. However, neural networks are still often seen as a "black box" where learning occurs but cannot be understood in a human-interpretable way. Since these machine learning systems are increasingly being adopted in security contexts, it is important to explore these interpretations. We consider an Android malware traffic dataset for approaching this problem. Then, using the information plane, we explore how homeomorphism affects learned representation of the data and the invariance of the mutual information captured by the parameters on that data. We empirically validate these results, using accuracy as a second measure of similarity of learned representations. Our results suggest that although the details of learned representations and the specific coordinate system defined over the manifold of all parameters differ slightly, the functional approximations are the same. Furthermore, our results show that since mutual information remains invariant under homeomorphism, only feature engineering methods that alter the entropy of the dataset will change the outcome of the neural network. This means that for some datasets and tasks, neural networks require meaningful, human-driven feature engineering or changes in architecture to provide enough information for the neural network to generate a sufficient statistic. Applying our results can serve to guide analysis methods for machine learning engineers and suggests that neural networks that can exploit the convolution theorem are equally accurate as standard convolutional neural networks, and can be more computationally efficient.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The State of AI Ethics Report (June 2020)

These past few months have been especially challenging, and the deployment of technology in ways hitherto untested at an unrivalled pace has left the internet and technology watchers aghast. Artificial intelligence has become the byword for technological progress and is being used in everything from helping us combat the COVID-19 pandemic to nudging our attention in different directions as we all spend increasingly larger amounts of time online. It has never been more important that we keep a sharp eye out on the development of this field and how it is shaping our society and interactions with each other. With this inaugural edition of the State of AI Ethics we hope to bring forward the most important developments that caught our attention at the Montreal AI Ethics Institute this past quarter. Our goal is to help you navigate this ever-evolving field swiftly and allow you and your organization to make informed decisions. This pulse-check for the state of discourse, research, and development is geared towards researchers and practitioners alike who are making decisions on behalf of their organizations in considering the societal impacts of AI-enabled solutions. We cover a wide set of areas in this report spanning Agency and Responsibility, Security and Risk, Disinformation, Jobs and Labor, the Future of AI Ethics, and more. Our staff has worked tirelessly over the past quarter surfacing signal from the noise so that you are equipped with the right tools and knowledge to confidently tread this complex yet consequential domain.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access