Model Transparency and Interpretability : Survey and Application to the Insurance Industry

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2209.00562v1
• Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 16:12:54 GMT
• Title: Model Transparency and Interpretability : Survey and Application to the Insurance Industry
• Authors: Dimitri Delcaillau, Antoine Ly, Alize Papp and Franck Vermet
• Abstract summary: This paper introduces the importance of model tackles interpretation and the notion of model transparency. Within an insurance context, it illustrates how some tools can be used to enforce the control of actuarial models.
• Score: 1.6058099298620423
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The use of models, even if efficient, must be accompanied by an understanding at all levels of the process that transforms data (upstream and downstream). Thus, needs increase to define the relationships between individual data and the choice that an algorithm could make based on its analysis (e.g. the recommendation of one product or one promotional offer, or an insurance rate representative of the risk). Model users must ensure that models do not discriminate and that it is also possible to explain their results. This paper introduces the importance of model interpretation and tackles the notion of model transparency. Within an insurance context, it specifically illustrates how some tools can be used to enforce the control of actuarial models that can nowadays leverage on machine learning. On a simple example of loss frequency estimation in car insurance, we show the interest of some interpretability methods to adapt explanation to the target audience.

Related papers

• Exploring the Trade-off between Plausibility, Change Intensity and Adversarial Power in Counterfactual Explanations using Multi-objective Optimization [73.89239820192894]
  We argue that automated counterfactual generation should regard several aspects of the produced adversarial instances. We present a novel framework for the generation of counterfactual examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-20T15:02:53Z)
• Cross-model Fairness: Empirical Study of Fairness and Ethics Under Model Multiplicity [10.144058870887061]
  We argue that individuals can be harmed when one predictor is chosen ad hoc from a group of equally well performing models. Our findings suggest that such unfairness can be readily found in real life and it may be difficult to mitigate by technical means alone.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-14T14:33:39Z)
• Explain, Edit, and Understand: Rethinking User Study Design for Evaluating Model Explanations [97.91630330328815]
  We conduct a crowdsourcing study, where participants interact with deception detection models that have been trained to distinguish between genuine and fake hotel reviews. We observe that for a linear bag-of-words model, participants with access to the feature coefficients during training are able to cause a larger reduction in model confidence in the testing phase when compared to the no-explanation control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-17T18:29:56Z)
• Beyond Trivial Counterfactual Explanations with Diverse Valuable Explanations [64.85696493596821]
  In computer vision applications, generative counterfactual methods indicate how to perturb a model's input to change its prediction. We propose a counterfactual method that learns a perturbation in a disentangled latent space that is constrained using a diversity-enforcing loss. Our model improves the success rate of producing high-quality valuable explanations when compared to previous state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-18T12:57:34Z)
• Characterizing Fairness Over the Set of Good Models Under Selective Labels [69.64662540443162]
  We develop a framework for characterizing predictive fairness properties over the set of models that deliver similar overall performance. We provide tractable algorithms to compute the range of attainable group-level predictive disparities. We extend our framework to address the empirically relevant challenge of selectively labelled data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-02T02:11:37Z)
• Trust but Verify: Assigning Prediction Credibility by Counterfactual Constrained Learning [123.3472310767721]
  Prediction credibility measures are fundamental in statistics and machine learning. These measures should account for the wide variety of models used in practice. The framework developed in this work expresses the credibility as a risk-fit trade-off.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-24T19:52:38Z)
• Information Laundering for Model Privacy [34.66708766179596]
  We propose information laundering, a novel framework for enhancing model privacy. Unlike data privacy that concerns the protection of raw data information, model privacy aims to protect an already-learned model that is to be deployed for public use.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-13T23:24:08Z)
• Interpretabilit\'e des mod\`eles : \'etat des lieux des m\'ethodes et application \`a l'assurance [1.6058099298620423]
  Data is the raw material of many models today make it possible to increase the quality and performance of digital services. Models users must ensure that models do not discriminate against and that it is also possible to explain its result. The widening of the panel of predictive algorithms leads scientists to be vigilant about the use of models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-25T12:18:07Z)
• Plausible Counterfactuals: Auditing Deep Learning Classifiers with Realistic Adversarial Examples [84.8370546614042]
  Black-box nature of Deep Learning models has posed unanswered questions about what they learn from data. Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) and multi-objectives are used to furnish a plausible attack to the audited model. Its utility is showcased within a human face classification task, unveiling the enormous potential of the proposed framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-25T11:08:56Z)
• Towards Explainability of Machine Learning Models in Insurance Pricing [0.0]
  We discuss the need for model interpretability in property & casualty insurance ratemaking. We propose a framework for explaining models, and present a case study to illustrate the framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-03-24T05:51:30Z)
• Asking the Right Questions: Learning Interpretable Action Models Through Query Answering [33.08099403894141]
  This paper develops a new approach for estimating an interpretable, relational model of a black-box autonomous agent that can plan and act. Our main contributions are a new paradigm for estimating such models using a minimal query interface with the agent, and a hierarchical querying algorithm that generates an interrogation policy for estimating the agent's internal model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-12-29T09:05:06Z)

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.