Faithfulness and the Notion of Adversarial Sensitivity in NLP Explanations
0
🔍
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- Examines the notion of "adversarial sensitivity" in natural language processing (NLP) explanations
- Explores the relationship between faithfulness (how well an explanation reflects the model's true decision-making process) and adversarial sensitivity (how much the explanation changes when inputs are perturbed)
- Presents a framework for understanding and measuring adversarial sensitivity in NLP explanation methods
Plain English Explanation
When we use machine learning models to make decisions or predictions, it's important to understand how the model is making those choices. Explanation methods aim to provide insights into the model's decision-making process. However, these explanations can be sensitive to small changes in the input data, which raises concerns about their faithfulness (how well they reflect the true inner workings of the model).
This paper explores the concept of "adversarial sensitivity" - how much the explanation changes when the input is slightly perturbed or modified. The researchers argue that there is a trade-off between faithfulness and adversarial sensitivity, and they present a framework for understanding and measuring this relationship.
By understanding the adversarial sensitivity of an explanation method, we can better assess its faithfulness and make informed decisions about which explanation method to use for a given task or application. This is particularly important in high-stakes domains like healthcare or finance, where we need to trust that the model's explanations are reliable and robust.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces the notion of adversarial sensitivity in the context of NLP explanation methods. The authors define adversarial sensitivity as "the degree to which an explanation changes when the input is slightly perturbed." This is an important consideration because it can undermine the faithfulness of an explanation, which refers to how well the explanation reflects the model's true decision-making process.
The researchers present a framework for understanding and measuring adversarial sensitivity. They propose two key metrics: explanation sensitivity and input sensitivity. Explanation sensitivity measures how much the explanation changes when the input is perturbed, while input sensitivity measures how much the model's output changes when the input is perturbed.
The authors then conduct experiments on several popular NLP explanation methods, including LIME, SHAP, and Gradient, to assess their adversarial sensitivity. They find that there is often a trade-off between faithfulness and adversarial sensitivity, and that certain explanation methods may be more robust to perturbations than others.
The paper also discusses the implications of adversarial sensitivity for the use of explanation methods in real-world applications, and suggests that future research should focus on developing explanation methods that are both faithful and robust to perturbations.
Critical Analysis
The paper raises important concerns about the faithfulness and robustness of NLP explanation methods, which is a crucial issue for the practical deployment of these techniques. The authors' framework for understanding and measuring adversarial sensitivity is a valuable contribution to the field, as it provides a systematic way to assess the reliability of explanation methods.
However, the paper does not address some potential limitations of the proposed approach. For example, the researchers only consider input perturbations and do not explore how other types of distributional shifts (e.g., dataset shift) might affect the adversarial sensitivity of explanations. Additionally, the paper does not delve into the specific mechanisms by which different explanation methods may be more or less sensitive to perturbations, which could provide valuable insights for developing more robust techniques.
Further research is needed to better understand the relationship between faithfulness and adversarial sensitivity, as well as to explore strategies for mitigating the adverse effects of adversarial sensitivity in real-world applications. The authors' work sets the stage for these important lines of inquiry.
Conclusion
This paper makes a significant contribution to the growing body of research on the faithfulness and robustness of NLP explanation methods. By introducing the concept of adversarial sensitivity and providing a framework for measuring it, the authors have shed light on a critical issue that must be addressed for explanation methods to be reliably deployed in high-stakes domains.
The insights and findings presented in this paper have important implications for the development of more transparent and trustworthy machine learning systems. As the use of AI continues to expand, ensuring the faithfulness and robustness of model explanations will be crucial for building public trust and confidence in these technologies.
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
🔍
0
Faithfulness and the Notion of Adversarial Sensitivity in NLP Explanations
Supriya Manna, Niladri Sett
Faithfulness is arguably the most critical metric to assess the reliability of explainable AI. In NLP, current methods for faithfulness evaluation are fraught with discrepancies and biases, often failing to capture the true reasoning of models. We introduce Adversarial Sensitivity as a novel approach to faithfulness evaluation, focusing on the explainer's response when the model is under adversarial attack. Our method accounts for the faithfulness of explainers by capturing sensitivity to adversarial input changes. This work addresses significant limitations in existing evaluation techniques, and furthermore, quantifies faithfulness from a crucial yet underexplored paradigm.
Read more9/27/2024
0
Local Explanations and Self-Explanations for Assessing Faithfulness in black-box LLMs
Christos Fragkathoulas, Odysseas S. Chlapanis
This paper introduces a novel task to assess the faithfulness of large language models (LLMs) using local perturbations and self-explanations. Many LLMs often require additional context to answer certain questions correctly. For this purpose, we propose a new efficient alternative explainability technique, inspired by the commonly used leave-one-out approach. Using this approach, we identify the sufficient and necessary parts for the LLM to generate correct answers, serving as explanations. We propose a metric for assessing faithfulness that compares these crucial parts with the self-explanations of the model. Using the Natural Questions dataset, we validate our approach, demonstrating its effectiveness in explaining model decisions and assessing faithfulness.
Read more9/24/2024
💬
0
FaithLM: Towards Faithful Explanations for Large Language Models
Yu-Neng Chuang, Guanchu Wang, Chia-Yuan Chang, Ruixiang Tang, Shaochen Zhong, Fan Yang, Mengnan Du, Xuanting Cai, Xia Hu
Large Language Models (LLMs) have become proficient in addressing complex tasks by leveraging their extensive internal knowledge and reasoning capabilities. However, the black-box nature of these models complicates the task of explaining their decision-making processes. While recent advancements demonstrate the potential of leveraging LLMs to self-explain their predictions through natural language (NL) explanations, their explanations may not accurately reflect the LLMs' decision-making process due to a lack of fidelity optimization on the derived explanations. Measuring the fidelity of NL explanations is a challenging issue, as it is difficult to manipulate the input context to mask the semantics of these explanations. To this end, we introduce FaithLM to explain the decision of LLMs with NL explanations. Specifically, FaithLM designs a method for evaluating the fidelity of NL explanations by incorporating the contrary explanations to the query process. Moreover, FaithLM conducts an iterative process to improve the fidelity of derived explanations. Experiment results on three datasets from multiple domains demonstrate that FaithLM can significantly improve the fidelity of derived explanations, which also provides a better alignment with the ground-truth explanations.
Read more6/27/2024
💬
0
Robust Infidelity: When Faithfulness Measures on Masked Language Models Are Misleading
Evan Crothers, Herna Viktor, Nathalie Japkowicz
A common approach to quantifying neural text classifier interpretability is to calculate faithfulness metrics based on iteratively masking salient input tokens and measuring changes in the model prediction. We propose that this property is better described as sensitivity to iterative masking, and highlight pitfalls in using this measure for comparing text classifier interpretability. We show that iterative masking produces large variation in faithfulness scores between otherwise comparable Transformer encoder text classifiers. We then demonstrate that iteratively masked samples produce embeddings outside the distribution seen during training, resulting in unpredictable behaviour. We further explore task-specific considerations that undermine principled comparison of interpretability using iterative masking, such as an underlying similarity to salience-based adversarial attacks. Our findings give insight into how these behaviours affect neural text classifiers, and provide guidance on how sensitivity to iterative masking should be interpreted.
Read more6/4/2024