Comparison of decision trees with Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME) technique and multi-linear regression for explaining support vector regression model in terms of root mean square error (RMSE) values

Overview

• This work explores the use of decision trees to explain the behavior of support vector regression (SVR) models.
• Decision trees are used as both a global and local technique to interpret the SVR model.
• The performance of decision trees is compared to the popular local explanation method LIME and multi-linear regression.

Plain English Explanation

In this research, the authors investigate using decision trees as a way to understand and interpret support vector regression (SVR) models. SVR is a type of machine learning model used for regression tasks, but it can be challenging to explain how it makes its predictions.

The researchers tested two ways of using decision trees to interpret SVR models:

1. As a global technique, where the decision tree tries to mimic the overall behavior of the SVR model.
2. As a local technique, where the decision tree explains the reasoning behind individual predictions made by the SVR model.

They compared the performance of these decision tree approaches against two other methods: LIME, a popular local explanation technique, and multi-linear regression.

The key finding is that the decision tree models were able to achieve a lower root-mean-square error (RMSE) when fitted to the SVR model, compared to LIME, in 87% of the test cases across 5 different datasets. This suggests that decision trees can often provide a more accurate explanation of the SVR model's behavior than LIME.

The decision trees also outperformed multi-linear regression when used as a local explanation method, and this difference was statistically significant.

Technical Explanation

The researchers evaluated the explanatory capabilities of decision trees in both a global and local context when applied to support vector regression (SVR) models.

For the global approach, they trained decision trees to mimic the overall behavior of the SVR model, with the goal of providing a high-level explanation of how the SVR model makes its predictions. They compared the root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the decision tree model to the RMSE of the original SVR model, as well as to the RMSE of explanations generated by the LIME local explanation method and multi-linear regression.

In the local approach, the decision trees were used to explain the reasoning behind individual predictions made by the SVR model. Again, the performance of the decision tree explanations was compared to LIME and multi-linear regression.

The experiments were conducted across 5 different datasets, and the results showed that the decision tree models achieved a lower RMSE when fitted to the SVR model, compared to LIME, in 87% of the test cases. This indicates that the decision trees were able to provide more accurate global explanations of the SVR model's behavior.

For the local explanation task, the decision trees also outperformed LIME and multi-linear regression, and the differences were statistically significant.

Critical Analysis

The research provides a compelling demonstration of how decision trees can be effectively used to interpret the behavior of support vector regression models. The finding that decision trees outperform LIME, a widely-used local explanation method, in the majority of test cases is particularly notable.

However, the paper does not delve into the potential limitations or caveats of this approach. For example, it would be valuable to understand how the performance of the decision tree models scales as the complexity of the underlying SVR model increases. Additionally, the authors do not explore how the decision tree explanations might differ from the "ground truth" of how the SVR model is actually making its predictions.

It would also be interesting to see how these techniques perform on a broader range of machine learning models, beyond just SVR, to assess their generalizability.

Overall, this research provides a strong foundation for using decision trees as a powerful tool for interpreting the behavior of complex machine learning models, but additional work is needed to fully understand the strengths, weaknesses, and appropriate applications of this approach.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that decision trees can be an effective technique for explaining the behavior of support vector regression (SVR) models, outperforming the popular LIME local explanation method in the majority of test cases.

The decision tree approach was shown to be effective both as a global technique, where the tree tries to mimic the overall SVR model, and as a local technique, where the tree explains the reasoning behind individual predictions.

The findings of this research have important implications for the field of interpretable machine learning, as they suggest decision trees could be a valuable tool for providing transparent and understandable explanations of complex models. This could be particularly useful in domains like healthcare, where model interpretability is crucial.

However, further research is needed to fully understand the limitations and appropriate applications of this approach. Exploring how it performs on a wider range of machine learning models and delving into the differences between decision tree explanations and the true inner workings of the models would be valuable next steps.