Evaluating the Utility of Model Explanations for Model Development
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2312.06032v1
- Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 23:13:23 GMT
- Title: Evaluating the Utility of Model Explanations for Model Development
- Authors: Shawn Im, Jacob Andreas, Yilun Zhou
- Abstract summary: 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.
- Score: 54.23538543168767
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: One of the motivations for explainable AI is to allow humans to make better
and more informed decisions regarding the use and deployment of AI models. But
careful evaluations are needed to assess whether this expectation has been
fulfilled. Current evaluations mainly focus on algorithmic properties of
explanations, and those that involve human subjects often employ subjective
questions to test human's perception of explanation usefulness, without being
grounded in objective metrics and measurements. In this work, we evaluate
whether explanations can improve human decision-making in practical scenarios
of machine learning model development. We conduct a mixed-methods user study
involving image data to evaluate saliency maps generated by SmoothGrad,
GradCAM, and an oracle explanation on two tasks: model selection and
counterfactual simulation. To our surprise, we did not find evidence of
significant improvement on these tasks when users were provided with any of the
saliency maps, even the synthetic oracle explanation designed to be simple to
understand and highly indicative of the answer. Nonetheless, explanations did
help users more accurately describe the models. These findings suggest caution
regarding the usefulness and potential for misunderstanding in saliency-based
explanations.
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) - CNN-based explanation ensembling for dataset, representation and explanations evaluation [1.1060425537315088]
We explore the potential of ensembling explanations generated by deep classification models using convolutional model.
Through experimentation and analysis, we aim to investigate the implications of combining explanations to uncover a more coherent and reliable patterns of the model's behavior.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-16T08:39:29Z) - Evaluating the Explainability of Attributes and Prototypes for a Medical Classification Model [0.0]
We evaluate attribute- and prototype-based explanations with the Proto-Caps model.
We can conclude that attribute scores and visual prototypes enhance confidence in the model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-15T16:43:24Z) - Explainability for Machine Learning Models: From Data Adaptability to
User Perception [0.8702432681310401]
This thesis explores the generation of local explanations for already deployed machine learning models.
It aims to identify optimal conditions for producing meaningful explanations considering both data and user requirements.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-16T18:44:37Z) - Digital Socrates: Evaluating LLMs through Explanation Critiques [37.25959112212333]
Digital Socrates is an open-source, automatic critique model for model explanations.
We show how Digital Socrates is useful for revealing insights about student models by examining their reasoning chains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-16T06:51:46Z) - Predictability and Comprehensibility in Post-Hoc XAI Methods: A
User-Centered Analysis [6.606409729669314]
Post-hoc explainability methods aim to clarify predictions of black-box machine learning models.
We conduct a user study to evaluate comprehensibility and predictability in two widely used tools: LIME and SHAP.
We find that the comprehensibility of SHAP is significantly reduced when explanations are provided for samples near a model's decision boundary.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-21T11:54:20Z) - 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) - Evaluating Explanations: How much do explanations from the teacher aid
students? [103.05037537415811]
We formalize the value of explanations using a student-teacher paradigm that measures the extent to which explanations improve student models in learning.
Unlike many prior proposals to evaluate explanations, our approach cannot be easily gamed, enabling principled, scalable, and automatic evaluation of attributions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-12-01T23:40:21Z) - Leakage-Adjusted Simulatability: Can Models Generate Non-Trivial
Explanations of Their Behavior in Natural Language? [86.60613602337246]
We introduce a leakage-adjusted simulatability (LAS) metric for evaluating NL explanations.
LAS measures how well explanations help an observer predict a model's output, while controlling for how explanations can directly leak the output.
We frame explanation generation as a multi-agent game and optimize explanations for simulatability while penalizing label leakage.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-08T16:59:07Z) - Are Visual Explanations Useful? A Case Study in Model-in-the-Loop
Prediction [49.254162397086006]
We study explanations based on visual saliency in an image-based age prediction task.
We find that presenting model predictions improves human accuracy.
However, explanations of various kinds fail to significantly alter human accuracy or trust in the model.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-07-23T20:39:40Z)
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.