Counterfactual Editing for Search Result Explanation
2301.10389
0
0
⛏️
Abstract
Search Result Explanation (SeRE) aims to improve search sessions' effectiveness and efficiency by helping users interpret documents' relevance. Existing works mostly focus on factual explanation, i.e. to find/generate supporting evidence about documents' relevance to search queries. However, research in cognitive sciences has shown that human explanations are contrastive i.e. people explain an observed event using some counterfactual events; such explanations reduce cognitive load and provide actionable insights. Though already proven effective in machine learning and NLP communities, there lacks a strict formulation on how counterfactual explanations should be defined and structured, in the context of web search. In this paper, we first discuss the possible formulation of counterfactual explanations in the IR context. Next, we formulate a suite of desiderata for counterfactual explanation in SeRE task and corresponding automatic metrics. With this desiderata, we propose a method named textbf{C}ountertextbf{F}actual textbf{E}diting for Search Research textbf{E}xplanation (textbf{CFE2}). CFE2 provides pairwise counterfactual explanations for document pairs within a search engine result page. Our experiments on five public search datasets demonstrate that CFE2 can significantly outperform baselines in both automatic metrics and human evaluations.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- The paper "Search Result Explanation (SeRE)" aims to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of search sessions by helping users better interpret the relevance of documents to their queries.
- Existing works mostly focus on factual explanations, which provide supporting evidence for a document's relevance.
- However, research in cognitive science has shown that human explanations are often "contrastive" - they compare the observed event to some counterfactual scenario, which can reduce cognitive load and provide actionable insights.
- The paper proposes a formulation of counterfactual explanations in the information retrieval (IR) context and a set of desiderata for such explanations, leading to a method called "Counterfactual Editing for Search Result Explanation (CFE2)".
- CFE2 generates pairwise counterfactual explanations for documents within a search engine result page, and the experiments show it outperforms baselines in both automatic metrics and human evaluations.
Plain English Explanation
When you search for something online, the search engine returns a list of potentially relevant documents. Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: Adapting Counterfactual explains that it's not always clear why a particular document is considered relevant. The paper "Search Result Explanation (SeRE)" aims to help users better understand the relevance of these search results.
Typically, search result explanations focus on providing factual information - for example, highlighting the parts of a document that match the search query. However, Graph Edits for Counterfactual Explanations: A Comparative Study shows that people often explain things by comparing them to hypothetical, "counterfactual" scenarios. For instance, you might explain why you chose a particular dish by saying "I picked this because the other option was too spicy."
The SeRE paper proposes a way to generate these types of counterfactual explanations for search results. The key idea is to compare each document in the search results to other, similar documents that were not chosen, and explain how the chosen document is different and more relevant. Learning Actionable Counterfactual Explanations in Large State Spaces suggests that this can help users understand the reasons behind the search results and make more informed decisions.
The paper defines a set of desirable properties for these counterfactual explanations, such as being concise, coherent, and actionable. It then presents a method called "Counterfactual Editing for Search Result Explanation (CFE2)" that can generate such explanations. A Framework for Feasible Counterfactual Exploration Incorporating Causality and Sparsity indicates that the experiments show CFE2 outperforms other approaches in both automatic metrics and human evaluations.
Technical Explanation
The paper "Search Result Explanation (SeRE)" proposes a new approach to helping users interpret the relevance of documents returned by a search engine. Existing work on "search result explanation" has focused on providing factual information, such as highlighting the parts of a document that match the search query.
However, the authors note that research in cognitive science has shown that human explanations are often "contrastive" - they compare the observed event to some hypothetical, "counterfactual" scenario. For example, when explaining why you chose a particular dish, you might say "I picked this because the other option was too spicy." Enhancing Counterfactual Explanation with Search Diffusion Distance and Directionality suggests that these types of counterfactual explanations can reduce cognitive load and provide more actionable insights.
Building on this insight, the paper first discusses how counterfactual explanations could be formulated in the context of information retrieval (IR). It then proposes a set of desiderata for such counterfactual explanations in the "Search Result Explanation" (SeRE) task, along with corresponding automatic evaluation metrics.
The paper then introduces a method called "Counterfactual Editing for Search Result Explanation" (CFE2), which generates pairwise counterfactual explanations for documents within a search engine result page. The key idea is to compare each document to other, similar documents that were not chosen, and explain how the chosen document is different and more relevant.
The authors evaluate CFE2 on five public search datasets and find that it significantly outperforms baseline methods in both automatic metrics and human evaluations.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents an interesting and well-motivated approach to improving search result explanations by incorporating counterfactual reasoning. The authors make a compelling case for the value of contrastive explanations based on research in cognitive science, and their proposed desiderata for counterfactual explanations in the IR context seem reasonable.
However, the paper does not delve deeply into the potential limitations or challenges of their approach. For example, Graph Edits for Counterfactual Explanations: A Comparative Study suggests that generating high-quality counterfactual explanations can be computationally expensive, and it's unclear how the CFE2 method scales to large-scale search scenarios.
Additionally, the paper does not address potential biases or fairness concerns that could arise from the counterfactual explanations. A Framework for Feasible Counterfactual Exploration Incorporating Causality and Sparsity indicates that counterfactual reasoning can be influenced by the underlying data and models, and it would be important to ensure that the explanations do not perpetuate or amplify societal biases.
Overall, the paper presents a promising approach, but further research is needed to address these potential limitations and ensure the practical viability and ethical deployment of counterfactual explanations in search result interpretation.
Conclusion
The "Search Result Explanation (SeRE)" paper proposes a novel approach to helping users better interpret the relevance of search results by generating counterfactual explanations. The key insight is that human explanations often compare observed events to hypothetical scenarios, which can reduce cognitive load and provide more actionable insights.
Enhancing Counterfactual Explanation with Search Diffusion Distance and Directionality suggests that applying this principle to search result explanations could significantly improve the effectiveness and efficiency of search sessions. The paper formulates a set of desirable properties for counterfactual explanations in the IR context and presents a method called CFE2 that can generate such explanations.
The experimental results demonstrate that CFE2 outperforms baseline approaches, indicating the potential of counterfactual reasoning to enhance search result interpretation. However, further research is needed to address potential limitations and ensure the ethical deployment of such explanations at scale.
Overall, the "Search Result Explanation (SeRE)" paper represents an important step forward in leveraging cognitive science insights to improve information retrieval and search engine design, with promising implications for both users and search providers.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
🤖
Beyond One-Size-Fits-All: Adapting Counterfactual Explanations to User Objectives
Orfeas Menis Mastromichalakis, Jason Liartis, Giorgos Stamou
0
0
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has emerged as a critical area of research aimed at enhancing the transparency and interpretability of AI systems. Counterfactual Explanations (CFEs) offer valuable insights into the decision-making processes of machine learning algorithms by exploring alternative scenarios where certain factors differ. Despite the growing popularity of CFEs in the XAI community, existing literature often overlooks the diverse needs and objectives of users across different applications and domains, leading to a lack of tailored explanations that adequately address the different use cases. In this paper, we advocate for a nuanced understanding of CFEs, recognizing the variability in desired properties based on user objectives and target applications. We identify three primary user objectives and explore the desired characteristics of CFEs in each case. By addressing these differences, we aim to design more effective and tailored explanations that meet the specific needs of users, thereby enhancing collaboration with AI systems.
4/16/2024
🔮
Explaining Text Classifiers with Counterfactual Representations
Pirmin Lemberger, Antoine Saillenfest
0
0
One well motivated explanation method for classifiers leverages counterfactuals which are hypothetical events identical to real observations in all aspects except for one categorical feature. Constructing such counterfactual poses specific challenges for texts, however, as some attribute values may not necessarily align with plausible real-world events. In this paper we propose a simple method for generating counterfactuals by intervening in the space of text representations which bypasses this limitation. We argue that our interventions are minimally disruptive and that they are theoretically sound as they align with counterfactuals as defined in Pearl's causal inference framework. To validate our method, we conducted experiments first on a synthetic dataset and then on a realistic dataset of counterfactuals. This allows for a direct comparison between classifier predictions based on ground truth counterfactuals - obtained through explicit text interventions - and our counterfactuals, derived through interventions in the representation space. Eventually, we study a real world scenario where our counterfactuals can be leveraged both for explaining a classifier and for bias mitigation.
4/30/2024
Watermarking Counterfactual Explanations
Hangzhi Guo, Amulya Yadav
0
0
The field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) focuses on techniques for providing explanations to end-users about the decision-making processes that underlie modern-day machine learning (ML) models. Within the vast universe of XAI techniques, counterfactual (CF) explanations are often preferred by end-users as they help explain the predictions of ML models by providing an easy-to-understand & actionable recourse (or contrastive) case to individual end-users who are adversely impacted by predicted outcomes. However, recent studies have shown significant security concerns with using CF explanations in real-world applications; in particular, malicious adversaries can exploit CF explanations to perform query-efficient model extraction attacks on proprietary ML models. In this paper, we propose a model-agnostic watermarking framework (for adding watermarks to CF explanations) that can be leveraged to detect unauthorized model extraction attacks (which rely on the watermarked CF explanations). Our novel framework solves a bi-level optimization problem to embed an indistinguishable watermark into the generated CF explanation such that any future model extraction attacks that rely on these watermarked CF explanations can be detected using a null hypothesis significance testing (NHST) scheme, while ensuring that these embedded watermarks do not compromise the quality of the generated CF explanations. We evaluate this framework's performance across a diverse set of real-world datasets, CF explanation methods, and model extraction techniques, and show that our watermarking detection system can be used to accurately identify extracted ML models that are trained using the watermarked CF explanations. Our work paves the way for the secure adoption of CF explanations in real-world applications.
5/30/2024
Graph Edits for Counterfactual Explanations: A comparative study
Angeliki Dimitriou, Nikolaos Chaidos, Maria Lymperaiou, Giorgos Stamou
0
0
Counterfactuals have been established as a popular explainability technique which leverages a set of minimal edits to alter the prediction of a classifier. When considering conceptual counterfactuals on images, the edits requested should correspond to salient concepts present in the input data. At the same time, conceptual distances are defined by knowledge graphs, ensuring the optimality of conceptual edits. In this work, we extend previous endeavors on graph edits as counterfactual explanations by conducting a comparative study which encompasses both supervised and unsupervised Graph Neural Network (GNN) approaches. To this end, we pose the following significant research question: should we represent input data as graphs, which is the optimal GNN approach in terms of performance and time efficiency to generate minimal and meaningful counterfactual explanations for black-box image classifiers?
4/19/2024