No Arabic abstract
Despite their remarkable performance on a wide range of visual tasks, machine learning technologies often succumb to data distribution shifts. Consequently, a range of recent work explores techniques for detecting these shifts. Unfortunately, current techniques offer no explanations about what triggers the detection of shifts, thus limiting their utility to provide actionable insights. In this work, we present Concept Bottleneck Shift Detection (CBSD): a novel explainable shift detection method. CBSD provides explanations by identifying and ranking the degree to which high-level human-understandable concepts are affected by shifts. Using two case studies (dSprites and 3dshapes), we demonstrate how CBSD can accurately detect underlying concepts that are affected by shifts and achieve higher detection accuracy compared to state-of-the-art shift detection methods.
Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) are often used for sequential modeling of adverse outcomes in electronic health records (EHRs) due to their ability to encode past clinical states. These deep, recurrent architectures have displayed increased performance compared to other modeling approaches in a number of tasks, fueling the interest in deploying deep models in clinical settings. One of the key elements in ensuring safe model deployment and building user trust is model explainability. Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV) has recently been introduced as a way of providing human-understandable explanations by comparing high-level concepts to the networks gradients. While the technique has shown promising results in real-world imaging applications, it has not been applied to structured temporal inputs. To enable an application of TCAV to sequential predictions in the EHR, we propose an extension of the method to time series data. We evaluate the proposed approach on an open EHR benchmark from the intensive care unit, as well as synthetic data where we are able to better isolate individual effects.
Interpretability has become an important topic of research as more machine learning (ML) models are deployed and widely used to make important decisions. Most of the current explanation methods provide explanations through feature importance scores, which identify features that are important for each individual input. However, how to systematically summarize and interpret such per sample feature importance scores itself is challenging. In this work, we propose principles and desiderata for emph{concept} based explanation, which goes beyond per-sample features to identify higher-level human-understandable concepts that apply across the entire dataset. We develop a new algorithm, ACE, to automatically extract visual concepts. Our systematic experiments demonstrate that alg discovers concepts that are human-meaningful, coherent and important for the neural networks predictions.
Human explanations of high-level decisions are often expressed in terms of key concepts the decisions are based on. In this paper, we study such concept-based explainability for Deep Neural Networks (DNNs). First, we define the notion of completeness, which quantifies how sufficient a particular set of concepts is in explaining a models prediction behavior based on the assumption that complete concept scores are sufficient statistics of the model prediction. Next, we propose a concept discovery method that aims to infer a complete set of concepts that are additionally encouraged to be interpretable, which addresses the limitations of existing methods on concept explanations. To define an importance score for each discovered concept, we adapt game-theoretic notions to aggregate over sets and propose ConceptSHAP. Via proposed metrics and user studies, on a synthetic dataset with apriori-known concept explanations, as well as on real-world image and language datasets, we validate the effectiveness of our method in finding concepts that are both complete in explaining the decisions and interpretable. (The code is released at https://github.com/chihkuanyeh/concept_exp)
Explaining deep learning model inferences is a promising venue for scientific understanding, improving safety, uncovering hidden biases, evaluating fairness, and beyond, as argued by many scholars. One of the principal benefits of counterfactual explanations is allowing users to explore what-if scenarios through what does not and cannot exist in the data, a quality that many other forms of explanation such as heatmaps and influence functions are inherently incapable of doing. However, most previous work on generative explainability cannot disentangle important concepts effectively, produces unrealistic examples, or fails to retain relevant information. We propose a novel approach, DISSECT, that jointly trains a generator, a discriminator, and a concept disentangler to overcome such challenges using little supervision. DISSECT generates Concept Traversals (CTs), defined as a sequence of generated examples with increasing degrees of concepts that influence a classifiers decision. By training a generative model from a classifiers signal, DISSECT offers a way to discover a classifiers inherent notion of distinct concepts automatically rather than rely on user-predefined concepts. We show that DISSECT produces CTs that (1) disentangle several concepts, (2) are influential to a classifiers decision and are coupled to its reasoning due to joint training (3), are realistic, (4) preserve relevant information, and (5) are stable across similar inputs. We validate DISSECT on several challenging synthetic and realistic datasets where previous methods fall short of satisfying desirable criteria for interpretability and show that it performs consistently well and better than existing methods. Finally, we present experiments showing applications of DISSECT for detecting potential biases of a classifier and identifying spurious artifacts that impact predictions.
Explaining the predictions made by complex machine learning models helps users to understand and accept the predicted outputs with confidence. One promising way is to use similarity-based explanation that provides similar instances as evidence to support model predictions. Several relevance metrics are used for this purpose. In this study, we investigated relevance metrics that can provide reasonable explanations to users. Specifically, we adopted three tests to evaluate whether the relevance metrics satisfy the minimal requirements for similarity-based explanation. Our experiments revealed that the cosine similarity of the gradients of the loss performs best, which would be a recommended choice in practice. In addition, we showed that some metrics perform poorly in our tests and analyzed the reasons of their failure. We expect our insights to help practitioners in selecting appropriate relevance metrics and also aid further researches for designing better relevance metrics for explanations.