F-Fidelity: A Robust Framework for Faithfulness Evaluation of Explainable AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.02970v1
• Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 20:23:06 GMT
• Title: F-Fidelity: A Robust Framework for Faithfulness Evaluation of Explainable AI
• Authors: Xu Zheng, Farhad Shirani, Zhuomin Chen, Chaohao Lin, Wei Cheng, Wenbo Guo, Dongsheng Luo,
• Abstract summary: Fine-tuned Fidelity F-Fidelity is a robust evaluation framework for XAI. We show that F-Fidelity significantly improves upon prior evaluation metrics in recovering the ground-truth ranking of explainers. We also show that given a faithful explainer, F-Fidelity metric can be used to compute the sparsity of influential input components.
• Score: 15.314388210699443
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent research has developed a number of eXplainable AI (XAI) techniques. Although extracting meaningful insights from deep learning models, how to properly evaluate these XAI methods remains an open problem. The most widely used approach is to perturb or even remove what the XAI method considers to be the most important features in an input and observe the changes in the output prediction. This approach although efficient suffers the Out-of-Distribution (OOD) problem as the perturbed samples may no longer follow the original data distribution. A recent method RemOve And Retrain (ROAR) solves the OOD issue by retraining the model with perturbed samples guided by explanations. However, the training may not always converge given the distribution difference. Furthermore, using the model retrained based on XAI methods to evaluate these explainers may cause information leakage and thus lead to unfair comparisons. We propose Fine-tuned Fidelity F-Fidelity, a robust evaluation framework for XAI, which utilizes i) an explanation-agnostic fine-tuning strategy, thus mitigating the information leakage issue and ii) a random masking operation that ensures that the removal step does not generate an OOD input. We designed controlled experiments with state-of-the-art (SOTA) explainers and their degraded version to verify the correctness of our framework. We conducted experiments on multiple data structures, such as images, time series, and natural language. The results demonstrate that F-Fidelity significantly improves upon prior evaluation metrics in recovering the ground-truth ranking of the explainers. Furthermore, we show both theoretically and empirically that, given a faithful explainer, F-Fidelity metric can be used to compute the sparsity of influential input components, i.e., to extract the true explanation size.

Related papers

• Effort: Efficient Orthogonal Modeling for Generalizable AI-Generated Image Detection [66.16595174895802]
  Existing AI-generated image (AIGI) detection methods often suffer from limited generalization performance. In this paper, we identify a crucial yet previously overlooked asymmetry phenomenon in AIGI detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-23T19:10:32Z)
• Attribute-to-Delete: Machine Unlearning via Datamodel Matching [65.13151619119782]
  Machine unlearning -- efficiently removing a small "forget set" training data on a pre-divertrained machine learning model -- has recently attracted interest. Recent research shows that machine unlearning techniques do not hold up in such a challenging setting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-30T17:20:10Z)
• Why Fine-Tuning Struggles with Forgetting in Machine Unlearning? Theoretical Insights and a Remedial Approach [19.307968983872588]
  Fine-tuning (FT) methods have become one of the fundamental approaches for approximating unlearning. We present the first theoretical analysis of FT methods for machine unlearning within a linear regression framework. We propose a theoretical approach to mitigate the retention of forgetting data in the pretrained model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T18:01:52Z)
• CHILLI: A data context-aware perturbation method for XAI [3.587367153279351]
  The trustworthiness of Machine Learning (ML) models can be difficult to assess, but is critical in high-risk or ethically sensitive applications. We propose a novel framework, CHILLI, for incorporating data context into XAI by generating contextually aware perturbations. This is shown to improve both the soundness and accuracy of the explanations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-10T10:18:07Z)
• Explainability of Machine Learning Models under Missing Data [2.880748930766428]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-29T11:31:09Z)
• XAL: EXplainable Active Learning Makes Classifiers Better Low-resource Learners [71.8257151788923]
  We propose a novel Explainable Active Learning framework (XAL) for low-resource text classification. XAL encourages classifiers to justify their inferences and delve into unlabeled data for which they cannot provide reasonable explanations. Experiments on six datasets show that XAL achieves consistent improvement over 9 strong baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T08:07:04Z)
• Precise Benchmarking of Explainable AI Attribution Methods [0.0]
  We propose a novel evaluation approach for benchmarking state-of-the-art XAI attribution methods. Our proposal consists of a synthetic classification model accompanied by its derived ground truth explanations. Our experimental results provide novel insights into the performance of Guided-Backprop and Smoothgrad XAI methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-06T17:03:32Z)
• Interpretable pipelines with evolutionarily optimized modules for RL tasks with visual inputs [5.254093731341154]
  We propose end-to-end pipelines composed of multiple interpretable models co-optimized by means of evolutionary algorithms. We test our approach in reinforcement learning environments from the Atari benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-10T10:33:44Z)
• Agree to Disagree: Diversity through Disagreement for Better Transferability [54.308327969778155]
  We propose D-BAT (Diversity-By-disAgreement Training), which enforces agreement among the models on the training data. We show how D-BAT naturally emerges from the notion of generalized discrepancy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-09T12:03:02Z)
• Leveraging Unlabeled Data to Predict Out-of-Distribution Performance [63.740181251997306]
  Real-world machine learning deployments are characterized by mismatches between the source (training) and target (test) distributions. In this work, we investigate methods for predicting the target domain accuracy using only labeled source data and unlabeled target data. We propose Average Thresholded Confidence (ATC), a practical method that learns a threshold on the model's confidence, predicting accuracy as the fraction of unlabeled examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-11T23:01:12Z)
• Imputation-Free Learning from Incomplete Observations [73.15386629370111]
  We introduce the importance of guided gradient descent (IGSGD) method to train inference from inputs containing missing values without imputation. We employ reinforcement learning (RL) to adjust the gradients used to train the models via back-propagation. Our imputation-free predictions outperform the traditional two-step imputation-based predictions using state-of-the-art imputation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-05T12:44:39Z)

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.