Counterfactual Explanation Policies in RL

As Reinforcement Learning (RL) agents are increasingly employed in diverse decision-making problems using reward preferences, it becomes important to ensure that policies learned by these frameworks in mapping observations to a probability distribution of the possible actions are explainable. However, there is little to no work in the systematic understanding of these complex policies in a contrastive manner, i.e., what minimal changes to the policy would improve/worsen its performance to a desired level. In this work, we present COUNTERPOL, the first framework to analyze RL policies using counterfactual explanations in the form of minimal changes to the policy that lead to the desired outcome. We do so by incorporating counterfactuals in supervised learning in RL with the target outcome regulated using desired return. We establish a theoretical connection between Counterpol and widely used trust region-based policy optimization methods in RL. Extensive empirical analysis shows the efficacy of COUNTERPOL in generating explanations for (un)learning skills while keeping close to the original policy. Our results on five different RL environments with diverse state and action spaces demonstrate the utility of counterfactual explanations, paving the way for new frontiers in designing and developing counterfactual policies.Comment: ICML Workshop on Counterfactuals in Minds and Machines, 202

Are Chatbots Ready for Privacy-Sensitive Applications? An Investigation into Input Regurgitation and Prompt-Induced Sanitization

LLM-powered chatbots are becoming widely adopted in applications such as healthcare, personal assistants, industry hiring decisions, etc. In many of these cases, chatbots are fed sensitive, personal information in their prompts, as samples for in-context learning, retrieved records from a database, or as part of the conversation. The information provided in the prompt could directly appear in the output, which might have privacy ramifications if there is sensitive information there. As such, in this paper, we aim to understand the input copying and regurgitation capabilities of these models during inference and how they can be directly instructed to limit this copying by complying with regulations such as HIPAA and GDPR, based on their internal knowledge of them. More specifically, we find that when ChatGPT is prompted to summarize cover letters of a 100 candidates, it would retain personally identifiable information (PII) verbatim in 57.4% of cases, and we find this retention to be non-uniform between different subgroups of people, based on attributes such as gender identity. We then probe ChatGPT's perception of privacy-related policies and privatization mechanisms by directly instructing it to provide compliant outputs and observe a significant omission of PII from output.Comment: 12 pages, 9 figures, and 4 table