Algorithms play a crucial role in many technological systems that control or affect various aspects of our lives. As a result, providing explanations for their decisions to address the needs of users and organisations is increasingly expected by laws, regulations, codes of conduct, and the public. However, as laws and regulations do not prescribe how to meet such expectations, organisations are often left to devise their own approaches to explainability, inevitably increasing the cost of compliance and good governance. Hence, we envision Explainability-by-Design, a holistic methodology characterised by proactive measures to include explanation capability in the design of decision-making systems. The methodology consists of three phases: (A) Explanation Requirement Analysis, (B) Explanation Technical Design, and (C) Explanation Validation. This paper describes phase (B), a technical workflow to implement explanation capability from requirements elicited by domain experts for a specific application context. Outputs of this phase are a set of configurations, allowing a reusable explanation service to exploit logs provided by the target application to create provenance traces of the application's decisions. The provenance then can be queried to extract relevant data points, which can be used in explanation plans to construct explanations personalised to their consumers. Following the workflow, organisations can design their decision-making systems to produce explanations that meet the specified requirements. To facilitate the process, we present a software architecture with reusable components to incorporate the resulting explanation capability into an application. Finally, we applied the workflow to two application scenarios and measured the associated development costs. It was shown that the approach is tractable in terms of development time, which can be as low as two hours per sentence.
相關內容
Man-at-the-end (MATE) attackers have full control over the system on which the attacked software runs, and try to break the confidentiality or integrity of assets embedded in the software. Both companies and malware authors want to prevent such attacks. This has driven an arms race between attackers and defenders, resulting in a plethora of different protection and analysis methods. However, it remains difficult to measure the strength of protections because MATE attackers can reach their goals in many different ways and a universally accepted evaluation methodology does not exist. This survey systematically reviews the evaluation methodologies of papers on obfuscation, a major class of protections against MATE attacks. For 572 papers, we collected 113 aspects of their evaluation methodologies, ranging from sample set types and sizes, over sample treatment, to performed measurements. We provide detailed insights into how the academic state of the art evaluates both the protections and analyses thereon. In summary, there is a clear need for better evaluation methodologies. We identify nine challenges for software protection evaluations, which represent threats to the validity, reproducibility, and interpretation of research results in the context of MATE attacks.
Large language models (LLMs) are gaining increasing popularity in both academia and industry, owing to their unprecedented performance in various applications. As LLMs continue to play a vital role in both research and daily use, their evaluation becomes increasingly critical, not only at the task level, but also at the society level for better understanding of their potential risks. Over the past years, significant efforts have been made to examine LLMs from various perspectives. This paper presents a comprehensive review of these evaluation methods for LLMs, focusing on three key dimensions: what to evaluate, where to evaluate, and how to evaluate. Firstly, we provide an overview from the perspective of evaluation tasks, encompassing general natural language processing tasks, reasoning, medical usage, ethics, educations, natural and social sciences, agent applications, and other areas. Secondly, we answer the `where' and `how' questions by diving into the evaluation methods and benchmarks, which serve as crucial components in assessing performance of LLMs. Then, we summarize the success and failure cases of LLMs in different tasks. Finally, we shed light on several future challenges that lie ahead in LLMs evaluation. Our aim is to offer invaluable insights to researchers in the realm of LLMs evaluation, thereby aiding the development of more proficient LLMs. Our key point is that evaluation should be treated as an essential discipline to better assist the development of LLMs. We consistently maintain the related open-source materials at: //github.com/MLGroupJLU/LLM-eval-survey.
A proper fusion of complex data is of interest to many researchers in diverse fields, including computational statistics, computational geometry, bioinformatics, machine learning, pattern recognition, quality management, engineering, statistics, finance, economics, etc. It plays a crucial role in: synthetic description of data processes or whole domains, creation of rule bases for approximate reasoning tasks, reaching consensus and selection of the optimal strategy in decision support systems, imputation of missing values, data deduplication and consolidation, record linkage across heterogeneous databases, and clustering. This open-access research monograph integrates the spread-out results from different domains using the methodology of the well-established classical aggregation framework, introduces researchers and practitioners to Aggregation 2.0, as well as points out the challenges and interesting directions for further research.
The goal of explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is to generate human-interpretable explanations, but there are no computationally precise theories of how humans interpret AI generated explanations. The lack of theory means that validation of XAI must be done empirically, on a case-by-case basis, which prevents systematic theory-building in XAI. We propose a psychological theory of how humans draw conclusions from saliency maps, the most common form of XAI explanation, which for the first time allows for precise prediction of explainee inference conditioned on explanation. Our theory posits that absent explanation humans expect the AI to make similar decisions to themselves, and that they interpret an explanation by comparison to the explanations they themselves would give. Comparison is formalized via Shepard's universal law of generalization in a similarity space, a classic theory from cognitive science. A pre-registered user study on AI image classifications with saliency map explanations demonstrate that our theory quantitatively matches participants' predictions of the AI.
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.
A community reveals the features and connections of its members that are different from those in other communities in a network. Detecting communities is of great significance in network analysis. Despite the classical spectral clustering and statistical inference methods, we notice a significant development of deep learning techniques for community detection in recent years with their advantages in handling high dimensional network data. Hence, a comprehensive overview of community detection's latest progress through deep learning is timely to both academics and practitioners. This survey devises and proposes a new taxonomy covering different categories of the state-of-the-art methods, including deep learning-based models upon deep neural networks, deep nonnegative matrix factorization and deep sparse filtering. The main category, i.e., deep neural networks, is further divided into convolutional networks, graph attention networks, generative adversarial networks and autoencoders. The survey also summarizes the popular benchmark data sets, model evaluation metrics, and open-source implementations to address experimentation settings. We then discuss the practical applications of community detection in various domains and point to implementation scenarios. Finally, we outline future directions by suggesting challenging topics in this fast-growing deep learning field.
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.
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.
Reasoning with knowledge expressed in natural language and Knowledge Bases (KBs) is a major challenge for Artificial Intelligence, with applications in machine reading, dialogue, and question answering. General neural architectures that jointly learn representations and transformations of text are very data-inefficient, and it is hard to analyse their reasoning process. These issues are addressed by end-to-end differentiable reasoning systems such as Neural Theorem Provers (NTPs), although they can only be used with small-scale symbolic KBs. In this paper we first propose Greedy NTPs (GNTPs), an extension to NTPs addressing their complexity and scalability limitations, thus making them applicable to real-world datasets. This result is achieved by dynamically constructing the computation graph of NTPs and including only the most promising proof paths during inference, thus obtaining orders of magnitude more efficient models. Then, we propose a novel approach for jointly reasoning over KBs and textual mentions, by embedding logic facts and natural language sentences in a shared embedding space. We show that GNTPs perform on par with NTPs at a fraction of their cost while achieving competitive link prediction results on large datasets, providing explanations for predictions, and inducing interpretable models. Source code, datasets, and supplementary material are available online at //github.com/uclnlp/gntp.
Inferring missing links in knowledge graphs (KG) has attracted a lot of attention from the research community. In this paper, we tackle a practical query answering task involving predicting the relation of a given entity pair. We frame this prediction problem as an inference problem in a probabilistic graphical model and aim at resolving it from a variational inference perspective. In order to model the relation between the query entity pair, we assume that there exists an underlying latent variable (paths connecting two nodes) in the KG, which carries the equivalent semantics of their relations. However, due to the intractability of connections in large KGs, we propose to use variation inference to maximize the evidence lower bound. More specifically, our framework (\textsc{Diva}) is composed of three modules, i.e. a posterior approximator, a prior (path finder), and a likelihood (path reasoner). By using variational inference, we are able to incorporate them closely into a unified architecture and jointly optimize them to perform KG reasoning. With active interactions among these sub-modules, \textsc{Diva} is better at handling noise and coping with more complex reasoning scenarios. In order to evaluate our method, we conduct the experiment of the link prediction task on multiple datasets and achieve state-of-the-art performances on both datasets.
小貼士
登錄享
相關主題
注冊地址： 北京市海淀區羊坊店路18號2幢3層301-191