Attention Please: What Transformer Models Really Learn for Process Prediction

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.07097v1
• Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 08:20:38 GMT
• Title: Attention Please: What Transformer Models Really Learn for Process Prediction
• Authors: Martin Käppel, Lars Ackermann, Stefan Jablonski, Simon Härtl,
• Abstract summary: This paper examines whether the attention scores of a transformer based next-activity prediction model can serve as an explanation for its decision-making. We find that attention scores in next-activity prediction models can serve as explainers and exploit this fact in two proposed graph-based explanation approaches.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Predictive process monitoring aims to support the execution of a process during runtime with various predictions about the further evolution of a process instance. In the last years a plethora of deep learning architectures have been established as state-of-the-art for different prediction targets, among others the transformer architecture. The transformer architecture is equipped with a powerful attention mechanism, assigning attention scores to each input part that allows to prioritize most relevant information leading to more accurate and contextual output. However, deep learning models largely represent a black box, i.e., their reasoning or decision-making process cannot be understood in detail. This paper examines whether the attention scores of a transformer based next-activity prediction model can serve as an explanation for its decision-making. We find that attention scores in next-activity prediction models can serve as explainers and exploit this fact in two proposed graph-based explanation approaches. The gained insights could inspire future work on the improvement of predictive business process models as well as enabling a neural network based mining of process models from event logs.

Related papers

• Explanatory Model Monitoring to Understand the Effects of Feature Shifts on Performance [61.06245197347139]
  We propose a novel approach to explain the behavior of a black-box model under feature shifts. We refer to our method that combines concepts from Optimal Transport and Shapley Values as Explanatory Performance Estimation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-24T18:28:19Z)
• Generating Feasible and Plausible Counterfactual Explanations for Outcome Prediction of Business Processes [45.502284864662585]
  We introduce a data-driven approach, REVISEDplus, to generate plausible counterfactual explanations. First, we restrict the counterfactual algorithm to generate counterfactuals that lie within a high-density region of the process data. We also ensure plausibility by learning sequential patterns between the activities in the process cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-14T09:56:35Z)
• Inter-case Predictive Process Monitoring: A candidate for Quantum Machine Learning? [0.0]
  This work builds upon the recent progress in inter-case Predictive Process Monitoring. It comprehensively benchmarks the impact of inter-case features on prediction accuracy. It includes quantum machine learning models, which are expected to provide an advantage over classical models. The evaluation on real-world training data from the BPI challenge shows that the inter-case features provide a significant boost by more than four percent in accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-30T18:33:45Z)
• VCNet: A self-explaining model for realistic counterfactual generation [52.77024349608834]
  Counterfactual explanation is a class of methods to make local explanations of machine learning decisions. We present VCNet-Variational Counter Net, a model architecture that combines a predictor and a counterfactual generator. We show that VCNet is able to both generate predictions, and to generate counterfactual explanations without having to solve another minimisation problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-21T08:45:32Z)
• Explainability in Process Outcome Prediction: Guidelines to Obtain Interpretable and Faithful Models [77.34726150561087]
  We define explainability through the interpretability of the explanations and the faithfulness of the explainability model in the field of process outcome prediction. This paper contributes a set of guidelines named X-MOP which allows selecting the appropriate model based on the event log specifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-30T05:59:50Z)
• Building Interpretable Models for Business Process Prediction using Shared and Specialised Attention Mechanisms [5.607831842909669]
  We address the "black-box" problem in predictive process analytics by building interpretable models. We propose two types of attentions: event attention to capture the impact of specific process events on a prediction, and attribute attention to reveal which attribute(s) of an event influenced the prediction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-03T10:17:05Z)
• Explainable AI Enabled Inspection of Business Process Prediction Models [2.5229940062544496]
  We present an approach that allows us to use model explanations to investigate certain reasoning applied by machine learned predictions. A novel contribution of our approach is the proposal of model inspection that leverages both the explanations generated by interpretable machine learning mechanisms and the contextual or domain knowledge extracted from event logs that record historical process execution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-16T06:51:18Z)
• Multivariate Business Process Representation Learning utilizing Gramian Angular Fields and Convolutional Neural Networks [0.0]
  Learning meaningful representations of data is an important aspect of machine learning. For predictive process analytics, it is essential to have all explanatory characteristics of a process instance available. We propose a novel approach for representation learning of business process instances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-15T10:21:14Z)
• Beyond Trivial Counterfactual Explanations with Diverse Valuable Explanations [64.85696493596821]
  In computer vision applications, generative counterfactual methods indicate how to perturb a model's input to change its prediction. We propose a counterfactual method that learns a perturbation in a disentangled latent space that is constrained using a diversity-enforcing loss. Our model improves the success rate of producing high-quality valuable explanations when compared to previous state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-03-18T12:57:34Z)
• Forethought and Hindsight in Credit Assignment [62.05690959741223]
  We work to understand the gains and peculiarities of planning employed as forethought via forward models or as hindsight operating with backward models. We investigate the best use of models in planning, primarily focusing on the selection of states in which predictions should be (re)-evaluated.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T16:00:47Z)
• Value-driven Hindsight Modelling [68.658900923595]
  Value estimation is a critical component of the reinforcement learning (RL) paradigm. Model learning can make use of the rich transition structure present in sequences of observations, but this approach is usually not sensitive to the reward function. We develop an approach for representation learning in RL that sits in between these two extremes. This provides tractable prediction targets that are directly relevant for a task, and can thus accelerate learning the value function.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-19T18:10:20Z)

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.