Towards Unifying Interpretability and Control: Evaluation via Intervention

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2411.04430v1
• Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2024 04:52:18 GMT
• Title: Towards Unifying Interpretability and Control: Evaluation via Intervention
• Authors: Usha Bhalla, Suraj Srinivas, Asma Ghandeharioun, Himabindu Lakkaraju,
• Abstract summary: We propose intervention as a fundamental goal of interpretability and introduce success criteria to evaluate how well methods are able to control model behavior through interventions. We extend four popular interpretability methods--sparse autoencoders, logit lens, tuned lens, and probing--into an abstract encoder-decoder framework. We introduce two new evaluation metrics: intervention success rate and the coherence-intervention tradeoff, designed to measure the accuracy of explanations and their utility in controlling model behavior.
• Score: 25.4582941170387
• License:
• Abstract: With the growing complexity and capability of large language models, a need to understand model reasoning has emerged, often motivated by an underlying goal of controlling and aligning models. While numerous interpretability and steering methods have been proposed as solutions, they are typically designed either for understanding or for control, seldom addressing both, with the connection between interpretation and control more broadly remaining tenuous. Additionally, the lack of standardized applications, motivations, and evaluation metrics makes it difficult to assess these methods' practical utility and efficacy. To address this, we propose intervention as a fundamental goal of interpretability and introduce success criteria to evaluate how well methods are able to control model behavior through interventions. We unify and extend four popular interpretability methods--sparse autoencoders, logit lens, tuned lens, and probing--into an abstract encoder-decoder framework. This framework maps intermediate latent representations to human-interpretable feature spaces, enabling interventions on these interpretable features, which can then be mapped back to latent representations to control model outputs. We introduce two new evaluation metrics: intervention success rate and the coherence-intervention tradeoff, designed to measure the accuracy of explanations and their utility in controlling model behavior. Our findings reveal that (1) although current methods allow for intervention, they are inconsistent across models and features, (2) lens-based methods outperform others in achieving simple, concrete interventions, and (3) interventions often compromise model performance and coherence, underperforming simpler alternatives, such as prompting, for steering model behavior and highlighting a critical shortcoming of current interpretability approaches in real-world applications requiring control.

Related papers

• Unsupervised Model Diagnosis [49.36194740479798]
  This paper proposes Unsupervised Model Diagnosis (UMO) to produce semantic counterfactual explanations without any user guidance. Our approach identifies and visualizes changes in semantics, and then matches these changes to attributes from wide-ranging text sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T17:59:03Z)
• Measuring the Reliability of Causal Probing Methods: Tradeoffs, Limitations, and the Plight of Nullifying Interventions [3.173096780177902]
  Causal probing is an approach to interpreting foundation models, such as large language models. We propose a general empirical analysis framework to evaluate the reliability of causal probing interventions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-28T03:45:49Z)
• Composable Interventions for Language Models [60.32695044723103]
  Test-time interventions for language models can enhance factual accuracy, mitigate harmful outputs, and improve model efficiency without costly retraining. But despite a flood of new methods, different types of interventions are largely developing independently. We introduce composable interventions, a framework to study the effects of using multiple interventions on the same language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-09T01:17:44Z)
• Causal Analysis for Robust Interpretability of Neural Networks [0.2519906683279152]
  We develop a robust interventional-based method to capture cause-effect mechanisms in pre-trained neural networks. We apply our method to vision models trained on classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-15T18:37:24Z)
• A Closer Look at the Intervention Procedure of Concept Bottleneck Models [18.222350428973343]
  Concept bottleneck models (CBMs) are a class of interpretable neural network models that predict the target response of a given input based on its high-level concepts. CBMs enable domain experts to intervene on the predicted concepts and rectify any mistakes at test time, so that more accurate task predictions can be made at the end. We develop various ways of selecting intervening concepts to improve the intervention effectiveness and conduct an array of in-depth analyses as to how they evolve under different circumstances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-28T02:37:24Z)
• Variable Importance Matching for Causal Inference [73.25504313552516]
  We describe a general framework called Model-to-Match that achieves these goals. Model-to-Match uses variable importance measurements to construct a distance metric. We operationalize the Model-to-Match framework with LASSO.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-23T00:43:03Z)
• Exploring the Trade-off between Plausibility, Change Intensity and Adversarial Power in Counterfactual Explanations using Multi-objective Optimization [73.89239820192894]
  We argue that automated counterfactual generation should regard several aspects of the produced adversarial instances. We present a novel framework for the generation of counterfactual examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-20T15:02:53Z)
• 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)
• Calibrating Healthcare AI: Towards Reliable and Interpretable Deep Predictive Models [41.58945927669956]
  We argue that these two objectives are not necessarily disparate and propose to utilize prediction calibration to meet both objectives. Our approach is comprised of a calibration-driven learning method, which is also used to design an interpretability technique based on counterfactual reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-27T22:15:17Z)
• Estimating the Effects of Continuous-valued Interventions using Generative Adversarial Networks [103.14809802212535]
  We build on the generative adversarial networks (GANs) framework to address the problem of estimating the effect of continuous-valued interventions. Our model, SCIGAN, is flexible and capable of simultaneously estimating counterfactual outcomes for several different continuous interventions. To address the challenges presented by shifting to continuous interventions, we propose a novel architecture for our discriminator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-27T18:46:21Z)

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.