Navigating Explanatory Multiverse Through Counterfactual Path Geometry
2306.02786
0
0
🤔
Abstract
Counterfactual explanations are the de facto standard when tasked with interpreting decisions of (opaque) predictive models. Their generation is often subject to algorithmic and domain-specific constraints -- such as density-based feasibility, and attribute (im)mutability or directionality of change -- that aim to maximise their real-life utility. In addition to desiderata with respect to the counterfactual instance itself, existence of a viable path connecting it with the factual data point, known as algorithmic recourse, has become an important technical consideration. While both of these requirements ensure that the steps of the journey as well as its destination are admissible, current literature neglects the multiplicity of such counterfactual paths. To address this shortcoming we introduce the novel concept of explanatory multiverse that encompasses all the possible counterfactual journeys. We then show how to navigate, reason about and compare the geometry of these trajectories with two methods: vector spaces and graphs. To this end, we overview their spacial properties -- such as affinity, branching, divergence and possible future convergence -- and propose an all-in-one metric, called opportunity potential, to quantify them. Implementing this (possibly interactive) explanatory process grants explainees agency by allowing them to select counterfactuals based on the properties of the journey leading to them in addition to their absolute differences. We show the flexibility, benefit and efficacy of such an approach through examples and quantitative evaluation on the German Credit and MNIST data sets.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper introduces the concept of an "explanatory multiverse" to address limitations in current methods for generating counterfactual explanations for predictive models.
- Counterfactual explanations are a way to interpret and understand the decisions of complex machine learning models.
- Existing methods for generating counterfactual explanations often have constraints related to the feasibility and "admissibility" of the counterfactual instance and the path connecting it to the original data point.
- The paper proposes methods to navigate, reason about, and compare the "geometry" of all possible counterfactual paths, rather than just focusing on a single counterfactual.
Plain English Explanation
When you use a complex machine learning model to make a decision, it can be difficult to understand why the model made that particular choice. Counterfactual explanations are a way to address this by showing what would need to change in the input data for the model to make a different decision.
However, current methods for generating counterfactual explanations often have limitations. They may focus only on a single counterfactual instance, without considering all the possible paths that could lead to that instance. They also have constraints around the "admissibility" of the counterfactual - meaning it has to be a realistic change that could plausibly occur in the real world.
To address these limitations, the paper introduces the concept of an "explanatory multiverse." This refers to all the possible counterfactual journeys or paths that could connect the original data point to a different model prediction. By exploring this "multiverse" of counterfactual paths, users can better understand the model's decision-making process and have more agency in selecting the counterfactual explanations that are most meaningful to them.
The paper proposes two methods for navigating and reasoning about this multiverse of counterfactual paths: vector spaces and graphs. These allow the researchers to analyze properties of the paths, such as how "close" they are to each other, where they branch off and diverge, and where they might converge in the future. They also introduce a metric called "opportunity potential" to quantify these spatial properties of the counterfactual paths.
Overall, this approach gives users more control and insight into the model's decision-making by letting them explore the full range of possible counterfactual explanations, not just a single pre-determined one.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces the novel concept of an "explanatory multiverse" to address limitations in current methods for generating counterfactual explanations for predictive models.
Counterfactual explanations are a way to interpret the decisions of complex, opaque machine learning models. They work by showing what changes would need to be made to the input data for the model to produce a different output. Current methods for generating counterfactual explanations often have domain-specific constraints, such as ensuring the counterfactual instance is "feasible" and the path connecting it to the original data point is "admissible."
While these constraints help make the counterfactuals more realistic and useful, they also limit the explanatory power by focusing on a single counterfactual. The paper argues that considering the "multiplicity of counterfactual paths" - i.e., the full range of possible journeys from the original data point to a different model output - can provide users with more agency and insight into the model's decision-making process.
To explore this "explanatory multiverse," the authors propose two methods: vector spaces and graphs. Using these representations, they analyze spatial properties of the counterfactual paths, such as their affinity, branching, divergence, and potential future convergence. They also introduce a metric called "opportunity potential" to quantify these path characteristics.
The paper demonstrates the flexibility and efficacy of this approach through examples and quantitative evaluation on the German Credit and MNIST datasets. By allowing users to navigate and compare the different counterfactual paths, this technique gives them more control over the explanatory process and the ability to select counterfactuals based on the properties of the journey, not just the end result.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes a compelling case for the limitations of existing counterfactual explanation methods and the potential value of the "explanatory multiverse" approach. By considering the full range of possible counterfactual paths, rather than just a single instance, users can gain deeper insights into the model's decision-making and have more agency in selecting the most meaningful explanations.
However, the paper does not fully address the potential computational and scalability challenges of this approach. Exploring all possible counterfactual paths could become prohibitively complex, especially for high-dimensional inputs or more complex models. The authors mention the possibility of interactive exploration, but more work may be needed to make this feasible in practice.
Additionally, the paper focuses primarily on the technical aspects of generating and navigating the explanatory multiverse, but does not delve deeply into the human factors and user experience considerations. It would be valuable to understand how users actually interact with and make use of this richer set of counterfactual explanations in real-world applications.
Another area for further research could be the integration of causal reasoning into the explanatory multiverse framework. Causal models could help strengthen the admissibility and plausibility of the counterfactual paths, as well as provide additional insights into the underlying decision-making process.
Overall, the paper presents an innovative and promising approach to improving the interpretability of complex predictive models. By expanding the scope of counterfactual explanations beyond a single instance, it opens up new avenues for users to better understand and interact with these powerful machine learning systems.
Conclusion
This paper introduces the concept of an "explanatory multiverse" to address limitations in current methods for generating counterfactual explanations for predictive models. Rather than focusing on a single counterfactual instance, the proposed approach explores the full range of possible counterfactual paths connecting the original data point to a different model output.
By representing these counterfactual paths using vector spaces and graphs, the researchers analyze their spatial properties, such as affinity, branching, divergence, and potential convergence. They also introduce a metric called "opportunity potential" to quantify these path characteristics.
This richer, multiverse-based approach to counterfactual explanations gives users more agency and insight into the model's decision-making process. Instead of just seeing a single pre-determined counterfactual, users can navigate, compare, and select explanations based on the properties of the entire "journey" leading to the alternative outcome.
While the paper does not fully address the potential scalability and human factors challenges of this approach, it presents an innovative and promising direction for improving the interpretability of complex predictive models. By expanding the scope of counterfactual explanations, it opens up new avenues for users to better understand and engage with these powerful 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
📊
Generating Counterfactual Explanations Using Cardinality Constraints
Rub'en Ruiz-Torrubiano
0
0
Providing explanations about how machine learning algorithms work and/or make particular predictions is one of the main tools that can be used to improve their trusworthiness, fairness and robustness. Among the most intuitive type of explanations are counterfactuals, which are examples that differ from a given point only in the prediction target and some set of features, presenting which features need to be changed in the original example to flip the prediction for that example. However, such counterfactuals can have many different features than the original example, making their interpretation difficult. In this paper, we propose to explicitly add a cardinality constraint to counterfactual generation limiting how many features can be different from the original example, thus providing more interpretable and easily understantable counterfactuals.
4/12/2024
A Framework for Feasible Counterfactual Exploration incorporating Causality, Sparsity and Density
Kleopatra Markou, Dimitrios Tomaras, Vana Kalogeraki, Dimitrios Gunopulos
0
0
The imminent need to interpret the output of a Machine Learning model with counterfactual (CF) explanations - via small perturbations to the input - has been notable in the research community. Although the variety of CF examples is important, the aspect of them being feasible at the same time, does not necessarily apply in their entirety. This work uses different benchmark datasets to examine through the preservation of the logical causal relations of their attributes, whether CF examples can be generated after a small amount of changes to the original input, be feasible and actually useful to the end-user in a real-world case. To achieve this, we used a black box model as a classifier, to distinguish the desired from the input class and a Variational Autoencoder (VAE) to generate feasible CF examples. As an extension, we also extracted two-dimensional manifolds (one for each dataset) that located the majority of the feasible examples, a representation that adequately distinguished them from infeasible ones. For our experimentation we used three commonly used datasets and we managed to generate feasible and at the same time sparse, CF examples that satisfy all possible predefined causal constraints, by confirming their importance with the attributes in a dataset.
4/23/2024
Unifying Perspectives: Plausible Counterfactual Explanations on Global, Group-wise, and Local Levels
Patryk Wielopolski, Oleksii Furman, Jerzy Stefanowski, Maciej Zik{e}ba
0
0
Growing regulatory and societal pressures demand increased transparency in AI, particularly in understanding the decisions made by complex machine learning models. Counterfactual Explanations (CFs) have emerged as a promising technique within Explainable AI (xAI), offering insights into individual model predictions. However, to understand the systemic biases and disparate impacts of AI models, it is crucial to move beyond local CFs and embrace global explanations, which offer a~holistic view across diverse scenarios and populations. Unfortunately, generating Global Counterfactual Explanations (GCEs) faces challenges in computational complexity, defining the scope of global, and ensuring the explanations are both globally representative and locally plausible. We introduce a novel unified approach for generating Local, Group-wise, and Global Counterfactual Explanations for differentiable classification models via gradient-based optimization to address these challenges. This framework aims to bridge the gap between individual and systemic insights, enabling a deeper understanding of model decisions and their potential impact on diverse populations. Our approach further innovates by incorporating a probabilistic plausibility criterion, enhancing actionability and trustworthiness. By offering a cohesive solution to the optimization and plausibility challenges in GCEs, our work significantly advances the interpretability and accountability of AI models, marking a step forward in the pursuit of transparent AI.
5/29/2024
GLANCE: Global Actions in a Nutshell for Counterfactual Explainability
Ioannis Emiris, Dimitris Fotakis, Giorgos Giannopoulos, Dimitrios Gunopulos, Loukas Kavouras, Kleopatra Markou, Eleni Psaroudaki, Dimitrios Rontogiannis, Dimitris Sacharidis, Nikolaos Theologitis, Dimitrios Tomaras, Konstantinos Tsopelas
0
0
Counterfactual explanations have emerged as an important tool to understand, debug, and audit complex machine learning models. To offer global counterfactual explainability, state-of-the-art methods construct summaries of local explanations, offering a trade-off among conciseness, counterfactual effectiveness, and counterfactual cost or burden imposed on instances. In this work, we provide a concise formulation of the problem of identifying global counterfactuals and establish principled criteria for comparing solutions, drawing inspiration from Pareto dominance. We introduce innovative algorithms designed to address the challenge of finding global counterfactuals for either the entire input space or specific partitions, employing clustering and decision trees as key components. Additionally, we conduct a comprehensive experimental evaluation, considering various instances of the problem and comparing our proposed algorithms with state-of-the-art methods. The results highlight the consistent capability of our algorithms to generate meaningful and interpretable global counterfactual explanations.
5/30/2024