Interdisciplinary Expertise to Advance Equitable Explainable AI

Overview

• The paper discusses the need for more rigorous attention to data representativeness and model performance to advance equity and reduce bias in artificial intelligence (AI) systems used in healthcare.
• It proposes a framework for interdisciplinary expert panel review to critically assess AI model explanations from multiple perspectives and identify areas of bias and directions for future research.
• The goal is to produce more accurate, equitable, and historically/contextually informed interpretations of AI models to reduce bias and identify opportunities for improvement.

Plain English Explanation

The paper highlights an important issue with the use of AI in healthcare - bias and poor performance for populations facing structural oppression. Previous work has shown that we need to be more careful about the data used to train these AI models and how well they perform for different groups of people.

The researchers propose a new approach to address this problem. They suggest bringing together a diverse group of experts - including those from fields like social epidemiology and health equity - to carefully review and discuss the explanations provided by AI models.

This interdisciplinary panel can help identify biases, potential confounding factors, and areas where more research is needed. By considering historical and cultural context, they can develop more accurate and equitable interpretations of the AI models. These insights can then be used to improve the AI models and make them more fair and reliable for all patients.

The key idea is to leverage expertise from different fields to collaboratively steer the development of these AI systems in healthcare, rather than relying solely on the technical details. This can help address issues of bias and privacy that come with using AI in sensitive domains like healthcare.

Technical Explanation

The paper proposes a framework for using an interdisciplinary expert panel to critically assess the explanations provided by AI models used in healthcare. The goal is to produce more accurate, equitable, and historically/contextually informed interpretations of these AI models.

The key elements of the framework are:

1. Assembling an interdisciplinary panel of experts, including those from fields like social epidemiology, health equity, and AI/machine learning.
2. Having the panel review and discuss the explanations provided by the AI models, considering factors like data representativeness, potential biases, and confounding variables.
3. Leveraging the diverse perspectives and domain knowledge of the panel to develop more nuanced and contextually appropriate interpretations of the AI model outputs.
4. Using these insights to identify areas for improvement in the AI models and directions for future research.

The authors argue that this approach can help reduce bias, improve model performance, and advance equity in the use of AI for healthcare applications.

Critical Analysis

The paper makes a compelling case for the need to go beyond just technical model explanations and incorporate interdisciplinary expertise to critically assess AI systems used in healthcare. This is an important step towards addressing persistent issues of bias and poor performance for marginalized populations.

One potential limitation is the practical challenge of assembling and coordinating such a diverse expert panel. The authors don't provide much detail on how this process would work in practice, and there may be logistical and resource constraints that could hinder implementation.

Additionally, the paper doesn't address the potential tension between the goal of producing more accurate, equitable interpretations and the inherent complexity and "black box" nature of many modern AI models. Bridging this gap may require further advancements in interpretable and explainable AI techniques.

Overall, the framework proposed in the paper is a valuable step towards more responsible and ethical development of AI systems in healthcare. Continued research and experimentation in this area will be crucial to ensuring these powerful technologies benefit all patients equitably.

Conclusion

This paper highlights the critical need to go beyond just technical model performance and address issues of bias and equity in the use of AI for healthcare applications. By bringing together an interdisciplinary panel of experts to critically assess AI model explanations, the researchers propose a framework for producing more accurate, equitable, and contextually informed interpretations.

Implementing this approach could lead to significant improvements in the fairness and reliability of AI systems used in sensitive domains like healthcare, ultimately helping to ensure these technologies benefit all patients, regardless of their background or circumstances.