An AI Architecture with the Capability to Explain Recognition Results

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.08740v2
• Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 16:54:44 GMT
• Title: An AI Architecture with the Capability to Explain Recognition Results
• Authors: Paul Whitten, Francis Wolff, Chris Papachristou,
• Abstract summary: This research focuses on the importance of metrics to explainability and contributes two methods yielding performance gains. The first method introduces a combination of explainable and unexplainable flows, proposing a metric to characterize explainability of a decision. The second method compares classic metrics for estimating the effectiveness of neural networks in the system, posing a new metric as the leading performer.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Explainability is needed to establish confidence in machine learning results. Some explainable methods take a post hoc approach to explain the weights of machine learning models, others highlight areas of the input contributing to decisions. These methods do not adequately explain decisions, in plain terms. Explainable property-based systems have been shown to provide explanations in plain terms, however, they have not performed as well as leading unexplainable machine learning methods. This research focuses on the importance of metrics to explainability and contributes two methods yielding performance gains. The first method introduces a combination of explainable and unexplainable flows, proposing a metric to characterize explainability of a decision. The second method compares classic metrics for estimating the effectiveness of neural networks in the system, posing a new metric as the leading performer. Results from the new methods and examples from handwritten datasets are presented.

Related papers

• Selective Explanations [14.312717332216073]
  A machine learning model is trained to predict feature attribution scores with only one inference. Despite their efficiency, amortized explainers can produce inaccurate predictions and misleading explanations. We propose selective explanations, a novel feature attribution method that detects when amortized explainers generate low-quality explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T23:08:31Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• Explainable Data-Driven Optimization: From Context to Decision and Back Again [76.84947521482631]
  Data-driven optimization uses contextual information and machine learning algorithms to find solutions to decision problems with uncertain parameters. We introduce a counterfactual explanation methodology tailored to explain solutions to data-driven problems. We demonstrate our approach by explaining key problems in operations management such as inventory management and routing.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-24T15:25:16Z)
• Complementary Explanations for Effective In-Context Learning [77.83124315634386]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable capabilities in learning from explanations in prompts. This work aims to better understand the mechanisms by which explanations are used for in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-25T04:40:47Z)
• Robustness and Usefulness in AI Explanation Methods [0.0]
  This work summarizes, compares, and contrasts three popular explanation methods: LIME, SmoothGrad, and SHAP. We evaluate these methods with respect to: robustness, in the sense of sample complexity and stability; understandability, in the sense that provided explanations are consistent with user expectations. This work concludes that current explanation methods are insufficient; that putting faith in and adopting these methods may actually be worse than simply not using them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-07T21:30:48Z)
• This is not the Texture you are looking for! Introducing Novel Counterfactual Explanations for Non-Experts using Generative Adversarial Learning [59.17685450892182]
  counterfactual explanation systems try to enable a counterfactual reasoning by modifying the input image. We present a novel approach to generate such counterfactual image explanations based on adversarial image-to-image translation techniques. Our results show that our approach leads to significantly better results regarding mental models, explanation satisfaction, trust, emotions, and self-efficacy than two state-of-the art systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-22T10:08:05Z)
• Reflective-Net: Learning from Explanations [3.6245632117657816]
  This work provides the first steps toward mimicking this process by capitalizing on the explanations generated based on existing explanation methods, i.e. Grad-CAM. Learning from explanations combined with conventional labeled data yields significant improvements for classification in terms of accuracy and training time.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-27T20:40:45Z)
• A Diagnostic Study of Explainability Techniques for Text Classification [52.879658637466605]
  We develop a list of diagnostic properties for evaluating existing explainability techniques. We compare the saliency scores assigned by the explainability techniques with human annotations of salient input regions to find relations between a model's performance and the agreement of its rationales with human ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-25T12:01:53Z)
• Explainable AI for Classification using Probabilistic Logic Inference [9.656846523452502]
  We present an explainable classification method. Our method works by first constructing a symbolic Knowledge Base from the training data, and then performing probabilistic inferences on such Knowledge Base with linear programming. It identifies decisive features that are responsible for a classification as explanations and produces results similar to the ones found by SHAP, a state of the artley Value based method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-05T11:39:23Z)
• Evaluating Explainable AI: Which Algorithmic Explanations Help Users Predict Model Behavior? [97.77183117452235]
  We carry out human subject tests to isolate the effect of algorithmic explanations on model interpretability. Clear evidence of method effectiveness is found in very few cases. Our results provide the first reliable and comprehensive estimates of how explanations influence simulatability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-04T20:35:17Z)

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.