Explainability of Machine Learning Models under Missing Data
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00411v1
- Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:31:09 GMT
- Title: Explainability of Machine Learning Models under Missing Data
- Authors: Tuan L. Vo, Thu Nguyen, Hugo L. Hammer, Michael A. Riegler, Pal Halvorsen,
- Abstract summary: Missing data is a prevalent issue that can significantly impair model performance and interpretability.
This paper briefly summarizes the development of the field of missing data and investigates the effects of various imputation methods on the calculation of Shapley values.
- Score: 2.880748930766428
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
- Abstract: Missing data is a prevalent issue that can significantly impair model performance and interpretability. This paper briefly summarizes the development of the field of missing data with respect to Explainable Artificial Intelligence and experimentally investigates the effects of various imputation methods on the calculation of Shapley values, a popular technique for interpreting complex machine learning models. We compare different imputation strategies and assess their impact on feature importance and interaction as determined by Shapley values. Moreover, we also theoretically analyze the effects of missing values on Shapley values. Importantly, our findings reveal that the choice of imputation method can introduce biases that could lead to changes in the Shapley values, thereby affecting the interpretability of the model. Moreover, and that a lower test prediction mean square error (MSE) may not imply a lower MSE in Shapley values and vice versa. Also, while Xgboost is a method that could handle missing data directly, using Xgboost directly on missing data can seriously affect interpretability compared to imputing the data before training Xgboost. This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of imputation methods in the context of model interpretation, offering practical guidance for selecting appropriate techniques based on dataset characteristics and analysis objectives. The results underscore the importance of considering imputation effects to ensure robust and reliable insights from machine learning models.
Related papers
- Distilled Datamodel with Reverse Gradient Matching [74.75248610868685]
We introduce an efficient framework for assessing data impact, comprising offline training and online evaluation stages.
Our proposed method achieves comparable model behavior evaluation while significantly speeding up the process compared to the direct retraining method.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-04-22T09:16:14Z) - Towards Better Modeling with Missing Data: A Contrastive Learning-based
Visual Analytics Perspective [7.577040836988683]
Missing data can pose a challenge for machine learning (ML) modeling.
Current approaches are categorized into feature imputation and label prediction.
This study proposes a Contrastive Learning framework to model observed data with missing values.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-18T13:16:24Z) - The Effect of Balancing Methods on Model Behavior in Imbalanced
Classification Problems [4.370097023410272]
Imbalanced data poses a challenge in classification as model performance is affected by insufficient learning from minority classes.
This study addresses a more challenging aspect of balancing methods - their impact on model behavior.
To capture these changes, Explainable Artificial Intelligence tools are used to compare models trained on datasets before and after balancing.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-30T22:25:01Z) - Stubborn Lexical Bias in Data and Models [50.79738900885665]
We use a new statistical method to examine whether spurious patterns in data appear in models trained on the data.
We apply an optimization approach to *reweight* the training data, reducing thousands of spurious correlations.
Surprisingly, though this method can successfully reduce lexical biases in the training data, we still find strong evidence of corresponding bias in the trained models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-06-03T20:12:27Z) - Metric Tools for Sensitivity Analysis with Applications to Neural
Networks [0.0]
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) aims to provide interpretations for predictions made by Machine Learning models.
In this paper, a theoretical framework is proposed to study sensitivities of ML models using metric techniques.
A complete family of new quantitative metrics called $alpha$-curves is extracted.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-03T18:10:21Z) - A prediction and behavioural analysis of machine learning methods for
modelling travel mode choice [0.26249027950824505]
We conduct a systematic comparison of different modelling approaches, across multiple modelling problems, in terms of the key factors likely to affect model choice.
Results indicate that the models with the highest disaggregate predictive performance provide poorer estimates of behavioural indicators and aggregate mode shares.
It is also observed that the MNL model performs robustly in a variety of situations, though ML techniques can improve the estimates of behavioural indices such as Willingness to Pay.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-01-11T11:10:32Z) - Striving for data-model efficiency: Identifying data externalities on
group performance [75.17591306911015]
Building trustworthy, effective, and responsible machine learning systems hinges on understanding how differences in training data and modeling decisions interact to impact predictive performance.
We focus on a particular type of data-model inefficiency, in which adding training data from some sources can actually lower performance evaluated on key sub-groups of the population.
Our results indicate that data-efficiency is a key component of both accurate and trustworthy machine learning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-11-11T16:48:27Z) - Measuring Causal Effects of Data Statistics on Language Model's
`Factual' Predictions [59.284907093349425]
Large amounts of training data are one of the major reasons for the high performance of state-of-the-art NLP models.
We provide a language for describing how training data influences predictions, through a causal framework.
Our framework bypasses the need to retrain expensive models and allows us to estimate causal effects based on observational data alone.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-07-28T17:36:24Z) - Diagnostic Tool for Out-of-Sample Model Evaluation [12.44615656370048]
We consider the use of a finite calibration data set to characterize the future, out-of-sample losses of a model.
We propose a simple model diagnostic tool that provides finite-sample guarantees under weak assumptions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-22T11:13:18Z) - Accurate and Robust Feature Importance Estimation under Distribution
Shifts [49.58991359544005]
PRoFILE is a novel feature importance estimation method.
We show significant improvements over state-of-the-art approaches, both in terms of fidelity and robustness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-09-30T05:29:01Z) - How Training Data Impacts Performance in Learning-based Control [67.7875109298865]
This paper derives an analytical relationship between the density of the training data and the control performance.
We formulate a quality measure for the data set, which we refer to as $rho$-gap.
We show how the $rho$-gap can be applied to a feedback linearizing control law.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-05-25T12:13:49Z)
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.