Deep learning has revolutionized many areas of machine learning, from computer vision to natural language processing, but these high-performance models are generally "black box." Explaining such models would improve transparency and trust in AI-powered decision making and is necessary for understanding other practical needs such as robustness and fairness. A popular means of enhancing model transparency is to quantify how individual inputs contribute to model outputs (called attributions) and the magnitude of interactions between groups of inputs. A growing number of these methods import concepts and results from game theory to produce attributions and interactions. This work presents a unifying framework for game-theory-inspired attribution and $k^\text{th}$-order interaction methods. We show that, given modest assumptions, a unique full account of interactions between features, called synergies, is possible in the continuous input setting. We identify how various methods are characterized by their policy of distributing synergies. We also demonstrate that gradient-based methods are characterized by their actions on monomials, a type of synergy function, and introduce unique gradient-based methods. We show that the combination of various criteria uniquely defines the attribution/interaction methods. Thus, the community needs to identify goals and contexts when developing and employing attribution and interaction methods.
Explainable Information Retrieval (XIR) is a growing research area focused on enhancing transparency and trustworthiness of the complex decision-making processes taking place in modern information retrieval systems. While there has been progress in developing XIR systems, empirical evaluation tools to assess the degree of explainability attained by such systems are lacking. To close this gap and gain insights into the true merit of XIR systems, we extend existing insights from a factor analysis of search explainability to introduce SSE (Search System Explainability), an evaluation metric for XIR search systems. Through a crowdsourced user study, we demonstrate SSE's ability to distinguish between explainable and non-explainable systems, showing that systems with higher scores indeed indicate greater interpretability. Additionally, we observe comparable perceived temporal demand and performance levels between non-native and native English speakers. We hope that aside from these concrete contributions to XIR, this line of work will serve as a blueprint for similar explainability evaluation efforts in other domains of machine learning and natural language processing.
Recent advances of data-driven machine learning have revolutionized fields like computer vision, reinforcement learning, and many scientific and engineering domains. In many real-world and scientific problems, systems that generate data are governed by physical laws. Recent work shows that it provides potential benefits for machine learning models by incorporating the physical prior and collected data, which makes the intersection of machine learning and physics become a prevailing paradigm. In this survey, we present this learning paradigm called Physics-Informed Machine Learning (PIML) which is to build a model that leverages empirical data and available physical prior knowledge to improve performance on a set of tasks that involve a physical mechanism. We systematically review the recent development of physics-informed machine learning from three perspectives of machine learning tasks, representation of physical prior, and methods for incorporating physical prior. We also propose several important open research problems based on the current trends in the field. We argue that encoding different forms of physical prior into model architectures, optimizers, inference algorithms, and significant domain-specific applications like inverse engineering design and robotic control is far from fully being explored in the field of physics-informed machine learning. We believe that this study will encourage researchers in the machine learning community to actively participate in the interdisciplinary research of physics-informed machine learning.
In recent years, Graph Neural Networks have reported outstanding performance in tasks like community detection, molecule classification and link prediction. However, the black-box nature of these models prevents their application in domains like health and finance, where understanding the models' decisions is essential. Counterfactual Explanations (CE) provide these understandings through examples. Moreover, the literature on CE is flourishing with novel explanation methods which are tailored to graph learning. In this survey, we analyse the existing Graph Counterfactual Explanation methods, by providing the reader with an organisation of the literature according to a uniform formal notation for definitions, datasets, and metrics, thus, simplifying potential comparisons w.r.t to the method advantages and disadvantages. We discussed seven methods and sixteen synthetic and real datasets providing details on the possible generation strategies. We highlight the most common evaluation strategies and formalise nine of the metrics used in the literature. We first introduce the evaluation framework GRETEL and how it is possible to extend and use it while providing a further dimension of comparison encompassing reproducibility aspects. Finally, we provide a discussion on how counterfactual explanation interplays with privacy and fairness, before delving into open challenges and future works.
Autonomic computing investigates how systems can achieve (user) specified control outcomes on their own, without the intervention of a human operator. Autonomic computing fundamentals have been substantially influenced by those of control theory for closed and open-loop systems. In practice, complex systems may exhibit a number of concurrent and inter-dependent control loops. Despite research into autonomic models for managing computer resources, ranging from individual resources (e.g., web servers) to a resource ensemble (e.g., multiple resources within a data center), research into integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) to improve resource autonomy and performance at scale continues to be a fundamental challenge. The integration of AI/ML to achieve such autonomic and self-management of systems can be achieved at different levels of granularity, from full to human-in-the-loop automation. In this article, leading academics, researchers, practitioners, engineers, and scientists in the fields of cloud computing, AI/ML, and quantum computing join to discuss current research and potential future directions for these fields. Further, we discuss challenges and opportunities for leveraging AI and ML in next generation computing for emerging computing paradigms, including cloud, fog, edge, serverless and quantum computing environments.
Deep neural networks (DNNs) have become a proven and indispensable machine learning tool. As a black-box model, it remains difficult to diagnose what aspects of the model's input drive the decisions of a DNN. In countless real-world domains, from legislation and law enforcement to healthcare, such diagnosis is essential to ensure that DNN decisions are driven by aspects appropriate in the context of its use. The development of methods and studies enabling the explanation of a DNN's decisions has thus blossomed into an active, broad area of research. A practitioner wanting to study explainable deep learning may be intimidated by the plethora of orthogonal directions the field has taken. This complexity is further exacerbated by competing definitions of what it means ``to explain'' the actions of a DNN and to evaluate an approach's ``ability to explain''. This article offers a field guide to explore the space of explainable deep learning aimed at those uninitiated in the field. The field guide: i) Introduces three simple dimensions defining the space of foundational methods that contribute to explainable deep learning, ii) discusses the evaluations for model explanations, iii) places explainability in the context of other related deep learning research areas, and iv) finally elaborates on user-oriented explanation designing and potential future directions on explainable deep learning. We hope the guide is used as an easy-to-digest starting point for those just embarking on research in this field.
Invariant approaches have been remarkably successful in tackling the problem of domain generalization, where the objective is to perform inference on data distributions different from those used in training. In our work, we investigate whether it is possible to leverage domain information from the unseen test samples themselves. We propose a domain-adaptive approach consisting of two steps: a) we first learn a discriminative domain embedding from unsupervised training examples, and b) use this domain embedding as supplementary information to build a domain-adaptive model, that takes both the input as well as its domain into account while making predictions. For unseen domains, our method simply uses few unlabelled test examples to construct the domain embedding. This enables adaptive classification on any unseen domain. Our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on various domain generalization benchmarks. In addition, we introduce the first real-world, large-scale domain generalization benchmark, Geo-YFCC, containing 1.1M samples over 40 training, 7 validation, and 15 test domains, orders of magnitude larger than prior work. We show that the existing approaches either do not scale to this dataset or underperform compared to the simple baseline of training a model on the union of data from all training domains. In contrast, our approach achieves a significant improvement.
Predictions obtained by, e.g., artificial neural networks have a high accuracy but humans often perceive the models as black boxes. Insights about the decision making are mostly opaque for humans. Particularly understanding the decision making in highly sensitive areas such as healthcare or fifinance, is of paramount importance. The decision-making behind the black boxes requires it to be more transparent, accountable, and understandable for humans. This survey paper provides essential definitions, an overview of the different principles and methodologies of explainable Supervised Machine Learning (SML). We conduct a state-of-the-art survey that reviews past and recent explainable SML approaches and classifies them according to the introduced definitions. Finally, we illustrate principles by means of an explanatory case study and discuss important future directions.
Machine learning plays a role in many deployed decision systems, often in ways that are difficult or impossible to understand by human stakeholders. Explaining, in a human-understandable way, the relationship between the input and output of machine learning models is essential to the development of trustworthy machine-learning-based systems. A burgeoning body of research seeks to define the goals and methods of explainability in machine learning. In this paper, we seek to review and categorize research on counterfactual explanations, a specific class of explanation that provides a link between what could have happened had input to a model been changed in a particular way. Modern approaches to counterfactual explainability in machine learning draw connections to the established legal doctrine in many countries, making them appealing to fielded systems in high-impact areas such as finance and healthcare. Thus, we design a rubric with desirable properties of counterfactual explanation algorithms and comprehensively evaluate all currently-proposed algorithms against that rubric. Our rubric provides easy comparison and comprehension of the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches and serves as an introduction to major research themes in this field. We also identify gaps and discuss promising research directions in the space of counterfactual explainability.
Interest in the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence has been growing for decades and has accelerated recently. As Artificial Intelligence models have become more complex, and often more opaque, with the incorporation of complex machine learning techniques, explainability has become more critical. Recently, researchers have been investigating and tackling explainability with a user-centric focus, looking for explanations to consider trustworthiness, comprehensibility, explicit provenance, and context-awareness. In this chapter, we leverage our survey of explanation literature in Artificial Intelligence and closely related fields and use these past efforts to generate a set of explanation types that we feel reflect the expanded needs of explanation for today's artificial intelligence applications. We define each type and provide an example question that would motivate the need for this style of explanation. We believe this set of explanation types will help future system designers in their generation and prioritization of requirements and further help generate explanations that are better aligned to users' and situational needs.
Machine-learning models have demonstrated great success in learning complex patterns that enable them to make predictions about unobserved data. In addition to using models for prediction, the ability to interpret what a model has learned is receiving an increasing amount of attention. However, this increased focus has led to considerable confusion about the notion of interpretability. In particular, it is unclear how the wide array of proposed interpretation methods are related, and what common concepts can be used to evaluate them. We aim to address these concerns by defining interpretability in the context of machine learning and introducing the Predictive, Descriptive, Relevant (PDR) framework for discussing interpretations. The PDR framework provides three overarching desiderata for evaluation: predictive accuracy, descriptive accuracy and relevancy, with relevancy judged relative to a human audience. Moreover, to help manage the deluge of interpretation methods, we introduce a categorization of existing techniques into model-based and post-hoc categories, with sub-groups including sparsity, modularity and simulatability. To demonstrate how practitioners can use the PDR framework to evaluate and understand interpretations, we provide numerous real-world examples. These examples highlight the often under-appreciated role played by human audiences in discussions of interpretability. Finally, based on our framework, we discuss limitations of existing methods and directions for future work. We hope that this work will provide a common vocabulary that will make it easier for both practitioners and researchers to discuss and choose from the full range of interpretation methods.