Explaining Groups of Instances Counterfactually for XAI: A Use Case, Algorithm and User Study for Group-Counterfactuals

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2303.09297v1
• Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2023 13:16:50 GMT
• Title: Explaining Groups of Instances Counterfactually for XAI: A Use Case, Algorithm and User Study for Group-Counterfactuals
• Authors: Greta Warren, Mark T. Keane, Christophe Gueret, Eoin Delaney
• Abstract summary: We explore a novel use case in which groups of similar instances are explained in a collective fashion. Group counterfactuals meet a human preference for coherent, broad explanations covering multiple events/instances. Results show that group counterfactuals elicit modest but definite improvements in people's understanding of an AI system.
• Score: 7.22614468437919
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Counterfactual explanations are an increasingly popular form of post hoc explanation due to their (i) applicability across problem domains, (ii) proposed legal compliance (e.g., with GDPR), and (iii) reliance on the contrastive nature of human explanation. Although counterfactual explanations are normally used to explain individual predictive-instances, we explore a novel use case in which groups of similar instances are explained in a collective fashion using ``group counterfactuals'' (e.g., to highlight a repeating pattern of illness in a group of patients). These group counterfactuals meet a human preference for coherent, broad explanations covering multiple events/instances. A novel, group-counterfactual algorithm is proposed to generate high-coverage explanations that are faithful to the to-be-explained model. This explanation strategy is also evaluated in a large, controlled user study (N=207), using objective (i.e., accuracy) and subjective (i.e., confidence, explanation satisfaction, and trust) psychological measures. The results show that group counterfactuals elicit modest but definite improvements in people's understanding of an AI system. The implications of these findings for counterfactual methods and for XAI are discussed.

Related papers

• XForecast: Evaluating Natural Language Explanations for Time Series Forecasting [72.57427992446698]
  Time series forecasting aids decision-making, especially for stakeholders who rely on accurate predictions. Traditional explainable AI (XAI) methods, which underline feature or temporal importance, often require expert knowledge. evaluating forecast NLEs is difficult due to the complex causal relationships in time series data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T05:16:39Z)
• CohEx: A Generalized Framework for Cohort Explanation [5.269665407562217]
  Cohort explanations offer insights into the explainee's behavior on a specific group or cohort of instances. In this paper, we discuss the unique challenges and opportunities associated with measuring cohort explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-17T03:36:18Z)
• Towards Non-Adversarial Algorithmic Recourse [20.819764720587646]
  It has been argued that adversarial examples, as opposed to counterfactual explanations, have a unique characteristic in that they lead to a misclassification compared to the ground truth. We introduce non-adversarial algorithmic recourse and outline why in high-stakes situations, it is imperative to obtain counterfactual explanations that do not exhibit adversarial characteristics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T14:18:21Z)
• Evaluating the Utility of Model Explanations for Model Development [54.23538543168767]
  We evaluate whether explanations can improve human decision-making in practical scenarios of machine learning model development. To our surprise, we did not find evidence of significant improvement on tasks when users were provided with any of the saliency maps. These findings suggest caution regarding the usefulness and potential for misunderstanding in saliency-based explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-10T23:13:23Z)
• 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)
• Counterfactuals of Counterfactuals: a back-translation-inspired approach to analyse counterfactual editors [3.4253416336476246]
  We focus on the analysis of counterfactual, contrastive explanations. We propose a new back translation-inspired evaluation methodology. We show that by iteratively feeding the counterfactual to the explainer we can obtain valuable insights into the behaviour of both the predictor and the explainer models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T16:04:28Z)
• "Explain it in the Same Way!" -- Model-Agnostic Group Fairness of Counterfactual Explanations [8.132423340684568]
  Counterfactual explanations tell the user what to do in order to change the outcome of the system in a desirable way. We propose a model-agnostic method for computing counterfactual explanations that do not differ significantly in their complexity between protected groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-27T15:24:06Z)
• Neural Causal Models for Counterfactual Identification and Estimation [62.30444687707919]
  We study the evaluation of counterfactual statements through neural models. First, we show that neural causal models (NCMs) are expressive enough. Second, we develop an algorithm for simultaneously identifying and estimating counterfactual distributions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-30T18:29:09Z)
• Logical Satisfiability of Counterfactuals for Faithful Explanations in NLI [60.142926537264714]
  We introduce the methodology of Faithfulness-through-Counterfactuals. It generates a counterfactual hypothesis based on the logical predicates expressed in the explanation. It then evaluates if the model's prediction on the counterfactual is consistent with that expressed logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T03:40:59Z)
• Nested Counterfactual Identification from Arbitrary Surrogate Experiments [95.48089725859298]
  We study the identification of nested counterfactuals from an arbitrary combination of observations and experiments. Specifically, we prove the counterfactual unnesting theorem (CUT), which allows one to map arbitrary nested counterfactuals to unnested ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-07T12:51:04Z)
• On the Objective Evaluation of Post Hoc Explainers [10.981508361941335]
  Modern trends in machine learning research have led to algorithms that are increasingly intricate to the degree that they are considered to be black boxes. In an effort to reduce the opacity of decisions, methods have been proposed to construe the inner workings of such models in a human-comprehensible manner. We propose a framework for the evaluation of post hoc explainers on ground truth that is directly derived from the additive structure of a model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-15T19:06:51Z)

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.