Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userEvaluations and Methods for Explanation through Robustness Analysis
130
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Feature based explanations, that provide importance of each feature towards the model prediction, is arguably one of the most intuitive ways to explain a model. In this paper, we establish a novel set of evaluation criteria for such feature based explanations by robustness analysis. In contrast to existing evaluations which require us to specify some way to remove features that could inevitably introduces biases and artifacts, we make use of the subtler notion of smaller adversarial perturbations. By optimizing towards our proposed evaluation criteria, we obtain new explanations that are loosely necessary and sufficient for a prediction. We further extend the explanation to extract the set of features that would move the current prediction to a target class by adopting targeted adversarial attack for the robustness analysis. Through experiments across multiple domains and a user study, we validate the usefulness of our evaluation criteria and our derived explanations.
rate research
Read More
Linear relaxation based perturbation analysis (LiRPA) for neural networks, which computes provable linear bounds of output neurons given a certain amount of input perturbation, has become a core component in robustness verification and certified defense. The majority of LiRPA-based methods focus on simple feed-forward networks and need particular manual derivations and implementations when extended to other architectures. In this paper, we develop an automatic framework to enable perturbation analysis on any neural network structures, by generalizing existing LiRPA algorithms such as CROWN to operate on general computational graphs. The flexibility, differentiability and ease of use of our framework allow us to obtain state-of-the-art results on LiRPA based certified defense on fairly complicated networks like DenseNet, ResNeXt and Transformer that are not supported by prior works. Our framework also enables loss fusion, a technique that significantly reduces the computational complexity of LiRPA for certified defense. For the first time, we demonstrate LiRPA based certified defense on Tiny ImageNet and Downscaled ImageNet where previous approaches cannot scale to due to the relatively large number of classes. Our work also yields an open-source library for the community to apply LiRPA to areas beyond certified defense without much LiRPA expertise, e.g., we create a neural network with a probably flat optimization landscape by applying LiRPA to network parameters. Our opensource library is available at https://github.com/KaidiXu/auto_LiRPA.
We present a more general analysis of $H$-calibration for adversarially robust classification. By adopting a finer definition of calibration, we can cover settings beyond the restricted hypothesis sets studied in previous work. In particular, our results hold for most common hypothesis sets used in machine learning. We both fix some previous calibration results (Bao et al., 2020) and generalize others (Awasthi et al., 2021). Moreover, our calibration results, combined with the previous study of consistency by Awasthi et al. (2021), also lead to more general $H$-consistency results covering common hypothesis sets.
Recent research has recognized interpretability and robustness as essential properties of trustworthy classification. Curiously, a connection between robustness and interpretability was empirically observed, but the theoretical reasoning behind it remained elusive. In this paper, we rigorously investigate this connection. Specifically, we focus on interpretation using decision trees and robustness to $l_{infty}$-perturbation. Previous works defined the notion of $r$-separation as a sufficient condition for robustness. We prove upper and lower bounds on the tree size in case the data is $r$-separated. We then show that a tighter bound on the size is possible when the data is linearly separated. We provide the first algorithm with provable guarantees both on robustness, interpretability, and accuracy in the context of decision trees. Experiments confirm that our algorithm yields classifiers that are both interpretable and robust and have high accuracy. The code for the experiments is available at https://github.com/yangarbiter/interpretable-robust-trees .
In this paper, we study counterfactual fairness in text classification, which asks the question: How would the prediction change if the sensitive attribute referenced in the example were different? Toxicity classifiers demonstrate a counterfactual fairness issue by predicting that Some people are gay is toxic while Some people are straight is nontoxic. We offer a metric, counterfactual token fairness (CTF), for measuring this particular form of fairness in text classifiers, and describe its relationship with group fairness. Further, we offer three approaches, blindness, counterfactual augmentation, and counterfactual logit pairing (CLP), for optimizing counterfactual token fairness during training, bridging the robustness and fairness literature. Empirically, we find that blindness and CLP address counterfactual token fairness. The methods do not harm classifier performance, and have varying tradeoffs with group fairness. These approaches, both for measurement and optimization, provide a new path forward for addressing fairness concerns in text classification.
Time series data is a collection of chronological observations which is generated by several domains such as medical and financial fields. Over the years, different tasks such as classification, forecasting, and clustering have been proposed to analyze this type of data. Time series data has been also used to study the effect of interventions over time. Moreover, in many fields of science, learning the causal structure of dynamic systems and time series data is considered an interesting task which plays an important role in scientific discoveries. Estimating the effect of an intervention and identifying the causal relations from the data can be performed via causal inference. Existing surveys on time series discuss traditional tasks such as classification and forecasting or explain the details of the approaches proposed to solve a specific task. In this paper, we focus on two causal inference tasks, i.e., treatment effect estimation and causal discovery for time series data, and provide a comprehensive review of the approaches in each task. Furthermore, we curate a list of commonly used evaluation metrics and datasets for each task and provide in-depth insight. These metrics and datasets can serve as benchmarks for research in the field.
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
