Fooling SHAP with Output Shuffling Attacks
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper proposes a new attack called "output shuffling" that can fool the popular SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations) model interpretation technique.
- SHAP is used to explain the predictions of machine learning models, but the authors show it can be manipulated to produce misleading explanations.
- The attack alters the model's outputs in a way that changes the SHAP values without affecting the model's performance on the task.
Plain English Explanation
The paper discusses a technique called "output shuffling" that can trick a popular model explanation method called SHAP. SHAP is used to understand how machine learning models make their predictions by identifying the most important input features.
However, the authors demonstrate that output shuffling can manipulate the SHAP values to produce misleading explanations, even though the model's actual performance remains unchanged. In other words, the attack allows them to "fool" SHAP into thinking certain features are more important than they really are.
This is significant because SHAP is widely used to provide transparency into how black box machine learning models work. If SHAP can be fooled, it calls into question the reliability of these model explanations. The paper highlights the need to be cautious when interpreting SHAP values and the importance of verifying the robustness of model explanation techniques.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a new attack called "output shuffling" that can fool the SHAP (Shapley Additive Explanations) model interpretation technique. SHAP is a popular method for explaining the predictions of machine learning models by identifying the most important input features.
The attack works by altering the model's outputs in a specific way that changes the SHAP values without affecting the model's actual performance on the task. This is achieved by shuffling the order of the model's output logits (the raw, unactivated outputs before the final classification decision).
The authors show that this output shuffling trick changes the SHAP values dramatically, even though the model's performance remains the same. This means SHAP can be manipulated to produce misleading explanations about which features are most important for the model's predictions.
The paper includes experiments on various models and datasets that demonstrate the effectiveness of the output shuffling attack. The authors also discuss potential defenses and countermeasures against this type of attack, highlighting the need for robust model interpretation techniques that are resistant to such manipulation.
Critical Analysis
The paper raises important concerns about the reliability of SHAP, a widely-used model explanation method. The authors show that SHAP can be fooled by a simple output shuffling attack, which casts doubt on the trustworthiness of SHAP-based explanations.
While the attack is clever, it is worth noting that it requires white-box access to the target model, meaning the attacker needs to know the model's architecture and internals. This may limit the practical applicability of the attack in some real-world scenarios.
Additionally, the authors acknowledge that their attack may not generalize to all types of machine learning models and datasets. More research is needed to understand the broader implications and potential countermeasures.
That said, the paper makes a valuable contribution by highlighting the potential vulnerabilities of model explanation techniques like SHAP. It encourages the AI research community to think critically about the trustworthiness and robustness of these methods, and to develop more secure and reliable approaches for explaining the inner workings of complex machine learning models.
Conclusion
The paper introduces a new "output shuffling" attack that can fool the popular SHAP model interpretation technique. SHAP is widely used to provide transparency into how machine learning models make their predictions, but the authors demonstrate that it can be manipulated to produce misleading explanations.
This work underscores the need for caution when interpreting SHAP values and the importance of verifying the robustness of model explanation techniques. As machine learning models become increasingly complex and influential, ensuring the trustworthiness and reliability of these interpretability tools is crucial for building reliable and transparent AI systems.
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
Fooling SHAP with Output Shuffling Attacks
Jun Yuan, Aritra Dasgupta
Explainable AI~(XAI) methods such as SHAP can help discover feature attributions in black-box models. If the method reveals a significant attribution from a ``protected feature'' (e.g., gender, race) on the model output, the model is considered unfair. However, adversarial attacks can subvert the detection of XAI methods. Previous approaches to constructing such an adversarial model require access to underlying data distribution, which may not be possible in many practical scenarios. We relax this constraint and propose a novel family of attacks, called shuffling attacks, that are data-agnostic. The proposed attack strategies can adapt any trained machine learning model to fool Shapley value-based explanations. We prove that Shapley values cannot detect shuffling attacks. However, algorithms that estimate Shapley values, such as linear SHAP and SHAP, can detect these attacks with varying degrees of effectiveness. We demonstrate the efficacy of the attack strategies by comparing the performance of linear SHAP and SHAP using real-world datasets.
Read more8/14/2024
0
Feature Inference Attack on Shapley Values
Xinjian Luo, Yangfan Jiang, Xiaokui Xiao
As a solution concept in cooperative game theory, Shapley value is highly recognized in model interpretability studies and widely adopted by the leading Machine Learning as a Service (MLaaS) providers, such as Google, Microsoft, and IBM. However, as the Shapley value-based model interpretability methods have been thoroughly studied, few researchers consider the privacy risks incurred by Shapley values, despite that interpretability and privacy are two foundations of machine learning (ML) models. In this paper, we investigate the privacy risks of Shapley value-based model interpretability methods using feature inference attacks: reconstructing the private model inputs based on their Shapley value explanations. Specifically, we present two adversaries. The first adversary can reconstruct the private inputs by training an attack model based on an auxiliary dataset and black-box access to the model interpretability services. The second adversary, even without any background knowledge, can successfully reconstruct most of the private features by exploiting the local linear correlations between the model inputs and outputs. We perform the proposed attacks on the leading MLaaS platforms, i.e., Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and IBM aix360. The experimental results demonstrate the vulnerability of the state-of-the-art Shapley value-based model interpretability methods used in the leading MLaaS platforms and highlight the significance and necessity of designing privacy-preserving model interpretability methods in future studies. To our best knowledge, this is also the first work that investigates the privacy risks of Shapley values.
Read more7/17/2024
🤿
0
Explaining deep learning models for spoofing and deepfake detection with SHapley Additive exPlanations
Wanying Ge, Jose Patino, Massimiliano Todisco, Nicholas Evans
Substantial progress in spoofing and deepfake detection has been made in recent years. Nonetheless, the community has yet to make notable inroads in providing an explanation for how a classifier produces its output. The dominance of black box spoofing detection solutions is at further odds with the drive toward trustworthy, explainable artificial intelligence. This paper describes our use of SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to gain new insights in spoofing detection. We demonstrate use of the tool in revealing unexpected classifier behaviour, the artefacts that contribute most to classifier outputs and differences in the behaviour of competing spoofing detection models. The tool is both efficient and flexible, being readily applicable to a host of different architecture models in addition to related, different applications. All results reported in the paper are reproducible using open-source software.
Read more4/29/2024
0
Unified Explanations in Machine Learning Models: A Perturbation Approach
Jacob Dineen, Don Kridel, Daniel Dolk, David Castillo
A high-velocity paradigm shift towards Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has emerged in recent years. Highly complex Machine Learning (ML) models have flourished in many tasks of intelligence, and the questions have started to shift away from traditional metrics of validity towards something deeper: What is this model telling me about my data, and how is it arriving at these conclusions? Inconsistencies between XAI and modeling techniques can have the undesirable effect of casting doubt upon the efficacy of these explainability approaches. To address these problems, we propose a systematic, perturbation-based analysis against a popular, model-agnostic method in XAI, SHapley Additive exPlanations (Shap). We devise algorithms to generate relative feature importance in settings of dynamic inference amongst a suite of popular machine learning and deep learning methods, and metrics that allow us to quantify how well explanations generated under the static case hold. We propose a taxonomy for feature importance methodology, measure alignment, and observe quantifiable similarity amongst explanation models across several datasets.
Read more5/31/2024