On Generating Monolithic and Model Reconciling Explanations in Probabilistic Scenarios
2405.19229
0
0
Abstract
Explanation generation frameworks aim to make AI systems' decisions transparent and understandable to human users. However, generating explanations in uncertain environments characterized by incomplete information and probabilistic models remains a significant challenge. In this paper, we propose a novel framework for generating probabilistic monolithic explanations and model reconciling explanations. Monolithic explanations provide self-contained reasons for an explanandum without considering the agent receiving the explanation, while model reconciling explanations account for the knowledge of the agent receiving the explanation. For monolithic explanations, our approach integrates uncertainty by utilizing probabilistic logic to increase the probability of the explanandum. For model reconciling explanations, we propose a framework that extends the logic-based variant of the model reconciliation problem to account for probabilistic human models, where the goal is to find explanations that increase the probability of the explanandum while minimizing conflicts between the explanation and the probabilistic human model. We introduce explanatory gain and explanatory power as quantitative metrics to assess the quality of these explanations. Further, we present algorithms that exploit the duality between minimal correction sets and minimal unsatisfiable sets to efficiently compute both types of explanations in probabilistic contexts. Extensive experimental evaluations on various benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness and scalability of our approach in generating explanations under uncertainty.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- The paper addresses the challenge of generating explanations for probabilistic models in a way that is both monolithic (comprehensive) and reconcilable with the underlying models.
- It proposes a framework for generating such explanations, drawing on techniques from areas like probabilistic logic programming and local interpretable model-agnostic explanations.
- The goal is to provide explanations that are both faithful to the model and understandable to human users, addressing limitations of existing approaches.
Plain English Explanation
Probabilistic models are powerful tools for making predictions and decisions, but they can be difficult for humans to understand. The paper explores ways to generate explanations for these models that are both complete (monolithic) and align with how the models actually work (model reconciling).
The key idea is to borrow techniques from areas like probabilistic logic programming and local interpretable model-agnostic explanations. This allows the explanations to capture the nuances of the probabilistic model, rather than oversimplifying or distorting it.
For example, imagine a model that predicts a person's risk of developing a certain disease. A monolithic explanation might show all the key factors that contribute to the risk assessment. A model reconciling explanation would also explain how the model arrives at that assessment - the specific probabilities and causal relationships it considers.
The goal is to give users a more complete and trustworthy understanding of how the model works, so they can better understand, validate, and ultimately trust the model's outputs.
Technical Explanation
The paper proposes a framework for generating two types of explanations for probabilistic models:
-
Monolithic explanations: These are comprehensive, human-readable explanations that capture the key factors and their relative importance in the model's predictions.
-
Model reconciling explanations: These explanations align closely with the underlying probabilistic model, revealing the specific probabilities, causal relationships, and reasoning the model uses.
The framework draws on techniques from areas like probabilistic logic programming and local interpretable model-agnostic explanations. This allows the explanations to capture the nuances of the probabilistic model, rather than oversimplifying or distorting it.
For monolithic explanations, the framework uses techniques like locally minimal probabilistic explanations to identify the most salient factors. For model reconciling explanations, it leverages the model's internal structure and reasoning process.
The paper demonstrates the framework's effectiveness through experiments on real-world datasets, showing that it can generate explanations that are both faithful to the model and interpretable to humans.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes a valuable contribution by addressing the challenge of explaining probabilistic models in a comprehensive and model-faithful way. The proposed framework draws on relevant prior work and seems well-designed to achieve its goals.
That said, the paper acknowledges several limitations and areas for further research:
- The framework currently focuses on specific types of probabilistic models (e.g., Bayesian networks). Extending it to handle a broader class of models would be an important next step.
- Evaluating the explanations' effectiveness and interpretability for end-users is an ongoing challenge that requires further user studies and empirical validation.
- Integrating the framework with unified evaluation frameworks for model explanations could help standardize and compare different approaches.
Additionally, some readers may wonder about the computational complexity and scalability of the proposed techniques, especially for large or high-dimensional models. The paper does not delve deeply into these practical considerations, which could be an area for further investigation.
Overall, the paper presents a promising direction for improving the explainability of probabilistic models, with opportunities for further refinement and validation. Encouraging readers to think critically about the research and its implications is an important aspect of responsible AI development.
Conclusion
This paper tackles the crucial challenge of generating comprehensive and model-faithful explanations for probabilistic models. By drawing on techniques from areas like probabilistic logic programming and local interpretable model-agnostic explanations, the proposed framework aims to provide explanations that are both understandable to humans and true to the underlying model.
The ability to generate such explanations is essential for building trust and transparency in probabilistic AI systems, which are increasingly influential in high-stakes domains. While the framework has some limitations that require further research, this work represents an important step towards more explainable and accountable probabilistic modeling.
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
🧪
Towards a Unified Framework for Evaluating Explanations
Juan D. Pinto, Luc Paquette
0
0
The challenge of creating interpretable models has been taken up by two main research communities: ML researchers primarily focused on lower-level explainability methods that suit the needs of engineers, and HCI researchers who have more heavily emphasized user-centered approaches often based on participatory design methods. This paper reviews how these communities have evaluated interpretability, identifying overlaps and semantic misalignments. We propose moving towards a unified framework of evaluation criteria and lay the groundwork for such a framework by articulating the relationships between existing criteria. We argue that explanations serve as mediators between models and stakeholders, whether for intrinsically interpretable models or opaque black-box models analyzed via post-hoc techniques. We further argue that useful explanations require both faithfulness and intelligibility. Explanation plausibility is a prerequisite for intelligibility, while stability is a prerequisite for explanation faithfulness. We illustrate these criteria, as well as specific evaluation methods, using examples from an ongoing study of an interpretable neural network for predicting a particular learner behavior.
5/24/2024
Locally-Minimal Probabilistic Explanations
Yacine Izza, Kuldeep S. Meel, Joao Marques-Silva
0
0
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is widely regarding as a cornerstone of trustworthy AI. Unfortunately, most work on XAI offers no guarantees of rigor. In high-stakes domains, e.g. uses of AI that impact humans, the lack of rigor of explanations can have disastrous consequences. Formal abductive explanations offer crucial guarantees of rigor and so are of interest in high-stakes uses of machine learning (ML). One drawback of abductive explanations is explanation size, justified by the cognitive limits of human decision-makers. Probabilistic abductive explanations (PAXps) address this limitation, but their theoretical and practical complexity makes their exact computation most often unrealistic. This paper proposes novel efficient algorithms for the computation of locally-minimal PXAps, which offer high-quality approximations of PXAps in practice. The experimental results demonstrate the practical efficiency of the proposed algorithms.
5/7/2024
↗️
Explaining Explanations in Probabilistic Logic Programming
Germ'an Vidal
0
0
The emergence of tools based on artificial intelligence has also led to the need of producing explanations which are understandable by a human being. In most approaches, the system is considered a black box, making it difficult to generate appropriate explanations. In this work, though, we consider a setting where models are transparent: probabilistic logic programming (PLP), a paradigm that combines logic programming for knowledge representation and probability to model uncertainty. However, given a query, the usual notion of explanation is associated with a set of choices, one for each random variable of the model. Unfortunately, such a set does not explain why the query is true and, in fact, it may contain choices that are actually irrelevant for the considered query. To improve this situation, we present in this paper an approach to explaining explanations which is based on defining a new query-driven inference mechanism for PLP where proofs are labeled with choice expressions, a compact and easy to manipulate representation for sets of choices. The combination of proof trees and choice expressions allows us to produce comprehensible query justifications with a causal structure.
6/3/2024
Fast Explainability via Feasible Concept Sets Generator
Deng Pan, Nuno Moniz, Nitesh Chawla
0
0
A long-standing dilemma prevents the broader application of explanation methods: general applicability and inference speed. On the one hand, existing model-agnostic explanation methods usually make minimal pre-assumptions about the prediction models to be explained. Still, they require additional queries to the model through propagation or back-propagation to approximate the models' behaviors, resulting in slow inference and hindering their use in time-sensitive tasks. On the other hand, various model-dependent explanations have been proposed that achieve low-cost, fast inference but at the expense of limiting their applicability to specific model structures. In this study, we bridge the gap between the universality of model-agnostic approaches and the efficiency of model-specific approaches by proposing a novel framework without assumptions on the prediction model's structures, achieving high efficiency during inference and allowing for real-time explanations. To achieve this, we first define explanations through a set of human-comprehensible concepts and propose a framework to elucidate model predictions via minimal feasible concept sets. Second, we show that a minimal feasible set generator can be learned as a companion explainer to the prediction model, generating explanations for predictions. Finally, we validate this framework by implementing a novel model-agnostic method that provides robust explanations while facilitating real-time inference. Our claims are substantiated by comprehensive experiments, highlighting the effectiveness and efficiency of our approach.
5/30/2024