Scientific Inference With Interpretable Machine Learning: Analyzing Models to Learn About Real-World Phenomena

Overview

• Scientists have traditionally used interpretable models to study real-world phenomena, but modern machine learning (ML) models lack this direct interpretability.
• Interpretable machine learning (IML) aims to analyze ML models holistically to derive interpretations, but current IML research focuses on auditing models rather than leveraging them for scientific inference.
• This work presents a framework for designing IML methods, called "property descriptors," that can reveal relevant properties of the observed data's underlying probability distribution.
• The framework empowers scientists to harness ML models for inference and provides directions for future IML research to support scientific understanding.

Plain English Explanation

Scientists have long used models with clear, easy-to-understand components to study the world around us. These models allow us to directly see how each part contributes to the overall picture. However, modern machine learning (ML) models, while incredibly powerful at making predictions, can be like black boxes - it's not always clear how they arrive at their results.

Interpretable machine learning (IML) aims to crack open these black boxes and make ML models more understandable. But so far, IML research has mostly focused on just auditing or inspecting the models, rather than using them to actually learn about the real-world phenomena they're modeling.

This paper presents a new framework that bridges that gap. It introduces the idea of "property descriptors" - ways of analyzing ML models that can reveal important insights about the actual data and processes being studied, not just the model itself. These property descriptors are grounded in statistical learning theory, which means they have a solid mathematical foundation.

By using property descriptors, scientists can harness the power of ML models to gain a deeper understanding of the world, rather than just treating the models as opaque prediction machines. The framework also provides guidance on how to develop new descriptors that can quantify the uncertainty in the insights they provide.

Overall, this work empowers scientists to get more out of their ML models, moving beyond just using them for predictions and towards using them as tools for genuine scientific discovery and inference. It also points the way for future IML research to better support real-world scientific understanding.

Technical Explanation

The authors argue that while traditional scientific models have clear, interpretable elements, modern machine learning (ML) models lack this direct elementwise interpretability (e.g., the weights in a neural network). Interpretable machine learning (IML) aims to analyze ML models holistically to derive interpretations, but current IML research is focused on auditing ML models rather than leveraging them for scientific inference.

To address this gap, the authors present a framework for designing IML methods, termed "property descriptors," that can illuminate not just the model, but also the phenomenon it represents. These property descriptors are grounded in statistical learning theory and can effectively reveal relevant properties of the joint probability distribution of the observational data.

The authors identify existing IML methods suited for scientific inference and provide a guide for developing new descriptors with quantified epistemic uncertainty. For example, they discuss how IML methods in neuroimaging and medical imaging can be leveraged for this purpose.

The framework aims to empower scientists to harness ML models for inference, moving beyond just using them for prediction. It also provides directions for future IML research to better support scientific understanding, in contrast to concerns about the reliability and interpretability of deep learning in science.

Critical Analysis

The authors make a compelling case for the need to bridge the gap between IML research and its application to scientific inference. By introducing the concept of "property descriptors," they provide a principled framework for leveraging ML models to gain insights into real-world phenomena, rather than just using them as black-box predictors.

However, the paper does not delve deeply into the specific implementation details or empirical evaluation of the property descriptor framework. While the authors mention the need to quantify epistemic uncertainty, they do not provide a comprehensive guide on how to develop new descriptors with this capability.

Additionally, the paper does not address potential limitations or caveats of the proposed approach, such as the potential for property descriptors to be biased or to fail to capture important aspects of the underlying data distribution.

Further research and empirical validation would be needed to fully assess the effectiveness and generalizability of the property descriptor framework across different scientific domains. Nonetheless, the core ideas presented in this work represent an important step towards bridging the gap between ML and scientific inference, and the authors provide a solid foundation for future IML research in this direction.

Conclusion

This paper presents a framework for designing interpretable machine learning (IML) methods, called "property descriptors," that can reveal relevant properties of the underlying probability distribution of observational data. By grounding these descriptors in statistical learning theory, the authors empower scientists to harness the power of modern ML models for genuine scientific inference, rather than just using them for prediction.

The framework provides a path forward for IML research to move beyond just auditing models and to actively support scientific understanding of real-world phenomena. While further work is needed to fully realize the potential of this approach, this paper lays the groundwork for a more fruitful integration of ML and scientific discovery.