Can you trust your explanations? A robustness test for feature attribution methods

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.14349v1
• Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 14:17:57 GMT
• Title: Can you trust your explanations? A robustness test for feature attribution methods
• Authors: Ilaria Vascotto, Alex Rodriguez, Alessandro Bonaita, Luca Bortolussi,
• Abstract summary: The field of Explainable AI (XAI) has seen a rapid growth but the usage of its techniques has at times led to unexpected results. We will show how leveraging manifold hypothesis and ensemble approaches can be beneficial to an in-depth analysis of the robustness.
• Score: 42.36530107262305
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The increase of legislative concerns towards the usage of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has recently led to a series of regulations striving for a more transparent, trustworthy and accountable AI. Along with these proposals, the field of Explainable AI (XAI) has seen a rapid growth but the usage of its techniques has at times led to unexpected results. The robustness of the approaches is, in fact, a key property often overlooked: it is necessary to evaluate the stability of an explanation (to random and adversarial perturbations) to ensure that the results are trustable. To this end, we propose a test to evaluate the robustness to non-adversarial perturbations and an ensemble approach to analyse more in depth the robustness of XAI methods applied to neural networks and tabular datasets. We will show how leveraging manifold hypothesis and ensemble approaches can be beneficial to an in-depth analysis of the robustness.

Related papers

• Rigorous Probabilistic Guarantees for Robust Counterfactual Explanations [80.86128012438834]
  We show for the first time that computing the robustness of counterfactuals with respect to plausible model shifts is NP-complete. We propose a novel probabilistic approach which is able to provide tight estimates of robustness with strong guarantees.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-10T09:13:11Z)
• Robust Graph Neural Networks via Unbiased Aggregation [20.40814320483077]
  adversarial robustness of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) has been questioned due to the false sense of security uncovered by strong adaptive attacks. We provide a unified robust estimation point of view to understand their robustness and limitations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-25T05:34:36Z)
• On the Robustness of Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis: Rethinking Model, Data, and Training [109.9218185711916]
  Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) aims at automatically inferring the specific sentiment polarities toward certain aspects of products or services behind social media texts or reviews. We propose to enhance the ABSA robustness by systematically rethinking the bottlenecks from all possible angles, including model, data, and training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-19T11:07:43Z)
• Causality-Aware Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations [7.412445894287709]
  We propose a novel extension to a widely used local and model-agnostic explainer, which encodes explicit causal relationships within the data surrounding the instance being explained. Our approach overcomes the original method in terms of faithfully replicating the black-box model's mechanism and the consistency and reliability of the generated explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-10T10:12:27Z)
• SAFARI: Versatile and Efficient Evaluations for Robustness of Interpretability [11.230696151134367]
  Interpretability of Deep Learning (DL) is a barrier to trustworthy AI. It is vital to assess how robust DL interpretability is, given an XAI method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-19T16:07:22Z)
• Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space [62.997667081978825]
  Counterfactual explanations aim to provide to end users a set of features that need to be changed in order to achieve a desired outcome. Current approaches rarely take into account the feasibility of actions needed to achieve the proposed explanations. We present Counterfactual Explanations as Interventions in Latent Space (CEILS), a methodology to generate counterfactual explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-14T20:48:48Z)
• Exploring Robustness of Unsupervised Domain Adaptation in Semantic Segmentation [74.05906222376608]
  We propose adversarial self-supervision UDA (or ASSUDA) that maximizes the agreement between clean images and their adversarial examples by a contrastive loss in the output space. This paper is rooted in two observations: (i) the robustness of UDA methods in semantic segmentation remains unexplored, which pose a security concern in this field; and (ii) although commonly used self-supervision (e.g., rotation and jigsaw) benefits image tasks such as classification and recognition, they fail to provide the critical supervision signals that could learn discriminative representation for segmentation tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-23T01:50:44Z)
• Uncertainty as a Form of Transparency: Measuring, Communicating, and Using Uncertainty [66.17147341354577]
  We argue for considering a complementary form of transparency by estimating and communicating the uncertainty associated with model predictions. We describe how uncertainty can be used to mitigate model unfairness, augment decision-making, and build trustworthy systems. This work constitutes an interdisciplinary review drawn from literature spanning machine learning, visualization/HCI, design, decision-making, and fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-15T17:26:14Z)
• Recent Advances in Understanding Adversarial Robustness of Deep Neural Networks [15.217367754000913]
  It is increasingly important to obtain models with high robustness that are resistant to adversarial examples. We give preliminary definitions on what adversarial attacks and robustness are. We study frequently-used benchmarks and mention theoretically-proved bounds for adversarial robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-03T07:42:53Z)

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.