Influence-Driven Explanations for Bayesian Network Classifiers

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2012.05773v3
• Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 17:04:12 GMT
• Title: Influence-Driven Explanations for Bayesian Network Classifiers
• Authors: Antonio Rago, Emanuele Albini, Pietro Baroni and Francesca Toni
• Abstract summary: We focus on explanations for discrete network Bayesian classifiers (BCs) We propose influence-driven explanations (IDXs) for BCs that include intermediate variables in explanations, rather than just the input and output variables as is standard practice.
• Score: 16.708069984516964
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: One of the most pressing issues in AI in recent years has been the need to address the lack of explainability of many of its models. We focus on explanations for discrete Bayesian network classifiers (BCs), targeting greater transparency of their inner workings by including intermediate variables in explanations, rather than just the input and output variables as is standard practice. The proposed influence-driven explanations (IDXs) for BCs are systematically generated using the causal relationships between variables within the BC, called influences, which are then categorised by logical requirements, called relation properties, according to their behaviour. These relation properties both provide guarantees beyond heuristic explanation methods and allow the information underpinning an explanation to be tailored to a particular context's and user's requirements, e.g., IDXs may be dialectical or counterfactual. We demonstrate IDXs' capability to explain various forms of BCs, e.g., naive or multi-label, binary or categorical, and also integrate recent approaches to explanations for BCs from the literature. We evaluate IDXs with theoretical and empirical analyses, demonstrating their considerable advantages when compared with existing explanation methods.

Related papers

• A Critical Assessment of Interpretable and Explainable Machine Learning for Intrusion Detection [0.0]
  We study the use of overly complex and opaque ML models, unaccounted data imbalances and correlated features, inconsistent influential features across different explanation methods, and the implausible utility of explanations. Specifically, we advise avoiding complex opaque models such as Deep Neural Networks and instead using interpretable ML models such as Decision Trees. We find that feature-based model explanations are most often inconsistent across different settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-04T15:35:42Z)
• Explaining Text Similarity in Transformer Models [52.571158418102584]
  Recent advances in explainable AI have made it possible to mitigate limitations by leveraging improved explanations for Transformers. We use BiLRP, an extension developed for computing second-order explanations in bilinear similarity models, to investigate which feature interactions drive similarity in NLP models. Our findings contribute to a deeper understanding of different semantic similarity tasks and models, highlighting how novel explainable AI methods enable in-depth analyses and corpus-level insights.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-10T17:11:31Z)
• Even-if Explanations: Formal Foundations, Priorities and Complexity [18.126159829450028]
  We show that both linear and tree-based models are strictly more interpretable than neural networks. We introduce a preference-based framework that enables users to personalize explanations based on their preferences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-17T11:38:58Z)
• Explaining Explainability: Towards Deeper Actionable Insights into Deep Learning through Second-order Explainability [70.60433013657693]
  Second-order explainable AI (SOXAI) was recently proposed to extend explainable AI (XAI) from the instance level to the dataset level. We demonstrate for the first time, via example classification and segmentation cases, that eliminating irrelevant concepts from the training set based on actionable insights from SOXAI can enhance a model's performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-14T23:24:01Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations Using Optimization With Constraint Learning [0.0]
  We propose a generic and flexible approach to counterfactual explanations using optimization with constraint learning (CE-OCL) Specifically, we discuss how we can leverage an optimization with constraint learning framework for the generation of counterfactual explanations. We also propose two novel modeling approaches to address data manifold closeness and diversity, which are two key criteria for practical counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-22T13:27:21Z)
• Variational Distillation for Multi-View Learning [104.17551354374821]
  We design several variational information bottlenecks to exploit two key characteristics for multi-view representation learning. Under rigorously theoretical guarantee, our approach enables IB to grasp the intrinsic correlation between observations and semantic labels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-20T03:09:46Z)
• Explainability in Process Outcome Prediction: Guidelines to Obtain Interpretable and Faithful Models [77.34726150561087]
  We define explainability through the interpretability of the explanations and the faithfulness of the explainability model in the field of process outcome prediction. This paper contributes a set of guidelines named X-MOP which allows selecting the appropriate model based on the event log specifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-30T05:59:50Z)
• Variational Causal Networks: Approximate Bayesian Inference over Causal Structures [132.74509389517203]
  We introduce a parametric variational family modelled by an autoregressive distribution over the space of discrete DAGs. In experiments, we demonstrate that the proposed variational posterior is able to provide a good approximation of the true posterior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T17:52:49Z)
• Do not explain without context: addressing the blind spot of model explanations [2.280298858971133]
  This paper highlights a blind spot which is often overlooked when monitoring and auditing machine learning models. We discuss that many model explanations depend directly or indirectly on the choice of the referenced data distribution. We showcase examples where small changes in the distribution lead to drastic changes in the explanations, such as a change in trend or, alarmingly, a conclusion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-28T12:48:40Z)
• Generative Counterfactuals for Neural Networks via Attribute-Informed Perturbation [51.29486247405601]
  We design a framework to generate counterfactuals for raw data instances with the proposed Attribute-Informed Perturbation (AIP) By utilizing generative models conditioned with different attributes, counterfactuals with desired labels can be obtained effectively and efficiently. Experimental results on real-world texts and images demonstrate the effectiveness, sample quality as well as efficiency of our designed framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-18T08:37:13Z)
• Case-Based Abductive Natural Language Inference [4.726777092009554]
  Case-Based Abductive Natural Language Inference (CB-ANLI) Case-Based Abductive Natural Language Inference (CB-ANLI)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-30T09:50:39Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.