Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userMulti-Objective Counterfactual Explanations
242
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Counterfactual explanations are one of the most popular methods to make predictions of black box machine learning models interpretable by providing explanations in the form of `what-if scenarios. Most current approaches optimize a collapsed, weighted sum of multiple objectives, which are naturally difficult to balance a-priori. We propose the Multi-Objective Counterfactuals (MOC) method, which translates the counterfactual search into a multi-objective optimization problem. Our approach not only returns a diverse set of counterfactuals with different trade-offs between the proposed objectives, but also maintains diversity in feature space. This enables a more detailed post-hoc analysis to facilitate better understanding and also more options for actionable user responses to change the predicted outcome. Our approach is also model-agnostic and works for numerical and categorical input features. We show the usefulness of MOC in concrete cases and compare our approach with state-of-the-art methods for counterfactual explanations.
rate research
Read More
Hyperparameter optimization (HPO) is increasingly used to automatically tune the predictive performance (e.g., accuracy) of machine learning models. However, in a plethora of real-world applications, accuracy is only one of the multiple -- often conflicting -- performance criteria, necessitating the adoption of a multi-objective (MO) perspective. While the literature on MO optimization is rich, few prior studies have focused on HPO. In this paper, we propose algorithms that extend asynchronous successive halving (ASHA) to the MO setting. Considering multiple evaluation metrics, we assess the performance of these methods on three real world tasks: (i) Neural architecture search, (ii) algorithmic fairness and (iii) language model optimization. Our empirical analysis shows that MO ASHA enables to perform MO HPO at scale. Further, we observe that that taking the entire Pareto front into account for candidate selection consistently outperforms multi-fidelity HPO based on MO scalarization in terms of wall-clock time. Our algorithms (to be open-sourced) establish new baselines for future research in the area.
AutoML systems are currently rising in popularity, as they can build powerful models without human oversight. They often combine techniques from many different sub-fields of machine learning in order to find a model or set of models that optimize a user-supplied criterion, such as predictive performance. The ultimate goal of such systems is to reduce the amount of time spent on menial tasks, or tasks that can be solved better by algorithms while leaving decisions that require human intelligence to the end-user. In recent years, the importance of other criteria, such as fairness and interpretability, and many others have become more and more apparent. Current AutoML frameworks either do not allow to optimize such secondary criteria or only do so by limiting the systems choice of models and preprocessing steps. We propose to optimize additional criteria defined by the user directly to guide the search towards an optimal machine learning pipeline. In order to demonstrate the need and usefulness of our approach, we provide a simple multi-criteria AutoML system and showcase an exemplary application.
In this work we formulate and formally characterize group fairness as a multi-objective optimization problem, where each sensitive group risk is a separate objective. We propose a fairness criterion where a classifier achieves minimax risk and is Pareto-efficient w.r.t. all groups, avoiding unnecessary harm, and can lead to the best zero-gap model if policy dictates so. We provide a simple optimization algorithm compatible with deep neural networks to satisfy these constraints. Since our method does not require test-time access to sensitive attributes, it can be applied to reduce worst-case classification errors between outcomes in unbalanced classification problems. We test the proposed methodology on real case-studies of predicting income, ICU patient mortality, skin lesions classification, and assessing credit risk, demonstrating how our framework compares favorably to other approaches.
In this work, we develop a technique to produce counterfactual visual explanations. Given a query image $I$ for which a vision system predicts class $c$, a counterfactual visual explanation identifies how $I$ could change such that the system would output a different specified class $c$. To do this, we select a distractor image $I$ that the system predicts as class $c$ and identify spatial regions in $I$ and $I$ such that replacing the identified region in $I$ with the identified region in $I$ would push the system towards classifying $I$ as $c$. We apply our approach to multiple image classification datasets generating qualitative results showcasing the interpretability and discriminativeness of our counterfactual explanations. To explore the effectiveness of our explanations in teaching humans, we present machine teaching experiments for the task of fine-grained bird classification. We find that users trained to distinguish bird species fare better when given access to counterfactual explanations in addition to training examples.
Both feature selection and hyperparameter tuning are key tasks in machine learning. Hyperparameter tuning is often useful to increase model performance, while feature selection is undertaken to attain sparse models. Sparsity may yield better model interpretability and lower cost of data acquisition, data handling and model inference. While sparsity may have a beneficial or detrimental effect on predictive performance, a small drop in performance may be acceptable in return for a substantial gain in sparseness. We therefore treat feature selection as a multi-objective optimization task. We perform hyperparameter tuning and feature selection simultaneously because the choice of features of a model may influence what hyperparameters perform well. We present, benchmark, and compare two different approaches for multi-objective joint hyperparameter optimization and feature selection: The first uses multi-objective model-based optimization. The second is an evolutionary NSGA-II-based wrapper approach to feature selection which incorporates specialized sampling, mutation and recombination operators. Both methods make use of parameterized filter ensembles. While model-based optimization needs fewer objective evaluations to achieve good performance, it incurs computational overhead compared to the NSGA-II, so the preferred choice depends on the cost of evaluating a model on given data.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
