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

Naveen Sundar Govindarajulu

Naveen Sundar Govindarajulu contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial Intelligencecs.CYLogic in Computer ScienceMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
4topics
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

3 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

AI Can Stop Mass Shootings, and More

We propose to build directly upon our longstanding, prior r&d in AI/machine ethics in order to attempt to make real the blue-sky idea of AI that can thwart mass shootings, by bringing to bear its ethical reasoning. The r&d in question is overtly and avowedly logicist in form, and since we are hardly the only ones who have established a firm foundation in the attempt to imbue AI's with their own ethical sensibility, the pursuit of our proposal by those in different methodological camps should, we believe, be considered as well. We seek herein to make our vision at least somewhat concrete by anchoring our exposition to two simulations, one in which the AI saves the lives of innocents by locking out a malevolent human's gun, and a second in which this malevolent agent is allowed by the AI to be neutralized by law enforcement. Along the way, some objections are anticipated, and rebutted.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Intra-Processing Methods for Debiasing Neural Networks

As deep learning models become tasked with more and more decisions that impact human lives, such as criminal recidivism, loan repayment, and face recognition for law enforcement, bias is becoming a growing concern. Debiasing algorithms are typically split into three paradigms: pre-processing, in-processing, and post-processing. However, in computer vision or natural language applications, it is common to start with a large generic model and then fine-tune to a specific use-case. Pre- or in-processing methods would require retraining the entire model from scratch, while post-processing methods only have black-box access to the model, so they do not leverage the weights of the trained model. Creating debiasing algorithms specifically for this fine-tuning use-case has largely been neglected. In this work, we initiate the study of a new paradigm in debiasing research, intra-processing, which sits between in-processing and post-processing methods. Intra-processing methods are designed specifically to debias large models which have been trained on a generic dataset and fine-tuned on a more specific task. We show how to repurpose existing in-processing methods for this use-case, and we also propose three baseline algorithms: random perturbation, layerwise optimization, and adversarial fine-tuning. All of our techniques can be used for all popular group fairness measures such as equalized odds or statistical parity difference. We evaluate these methods across three popular datasets from the AIF360 toolkit, as well as on the CelebA faces dataset. Our code is available at https://github.com/abacusai/intraprocessing_debiasing.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2019arXiv

On Quantified Modal Theorem Proving for Modeling Ethics

In the last decade, formal logics have been used to model a wide range of ethical theories and principles with the goal of using these models within autonomous systems. Logics for modeling ethical theories, and their automated reasoners, have requirements that are different from modal logics used for other purposes, e.g. for temporal reasoning. Meeting these requirements necessitates investigation of new approaches for proof automation. Particularly, a quantified modal logic, the deontic cognitive event calculus (DCEC), has been used to model various versions of the doctrine of double effect, akrasia, and virtue ethics. Using a fragment of DCEC, we outline these distinct characteristics and present a sketches of an algorithm that can help with some aspects proof automation for DCEC.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access