Towards User-Focused Research in Training Data Attribution for Human-Centered Explainable AI
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper discusses the importance of user-focused research in training data attribution for human-centered explainable AI (XAI).
- It highlights the need to understand users' needs and perspectives to develop XAI systems that are truly useful and trustworthy.
- The authors present a needfinding study to identify key user requirements for training data attribution in XAI.
Plain English Explanation
The paper focuses on making explainable AI (XAI) systems more user-friendly and trustworthy. XAI systems aim to explain how AI models make decisions, but the authors argue that current research often lacks a deep understanding of what users actually need from these explanations.
To address this, the authors conducted a needfinding study to better understand users' perspectives and requirements when it comes to the training data used to develop XAI systems. The goal was to identify key user needs that should guide future research and development in this area.
By taking a user-centered approach, the authors hope to create XAI systems that are truly useful and trustworthy for the people who rely on them, rather than just focusing on technical capabilities. This could lead to XAI systems that are more transparent, accountable, and aligned with human values.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a needfinding study to identify user requirements for training data attribution in human-centered XAI. The authors conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 participants from diverse backgrounds to understand their perspectives on the importance of training data transparency, the types of information they would find useful, and their concerns about potential misuse.
The interviews revealed several key user needs, including:
- Transparency about the sources and characteristics of training data
- Understanding how training data may introduce biases or skew model behavior
- Assurance that sensitive user data is not being used without consent
- Ability to validate and audit the training data used for critical decisions
Based on these findings, the authors propose a research agenda to better incorporate user needs into the design and evaluation of training data attribution mechanisms for XAI. This includes developing formal notions of "explanation correctness" and exploring ways to enable user control and oversight of the training data used in XAI systems.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes a strong case for the importance of user-focused research in XAI, highlighting how current technical approaches often fail to address the real-world needs and concerns of end-users. The needfinding study provides valuable insights that could help guide the development of more user-centered XAI systems.
However, the study has some limitations. The sample size is relatively small, and the participants may not be representative of the broader population of XAI users. Additionally, the authors acknowledge that their findings may be specific to the particular domain and use cases explored in the study.
Further research is needed to validate and expand on these findings, exploring user needs across a wider range of XAI applications and user groups. It will also be important to investigate how to effectively translate user requirements into concrete design and evaluation criteria for XAI systems.
Conclusion
This paper underscores the need for a user-focused approach to research and development in human-centered XAI. By deeply understanding users' needs and perspectives, the authors argue that we can create XAI systems that are more transparent, accountable, and aligned with human values.
The needfinding study provides a valuable starting point, highlighting key user requirements around training data transparency, bias, and consent. Addressing these needs could lead to XAI systems that are truly trustworthy and useful for the people who rely on them, rather than just serving the interests of AI developers and researchers.
Overall, this paper makes an important contribution to the growing field of human-centered XAI, laying the groundwork for a more user-focused research agenda in this critical area.
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
Towards User-Focused Research in Training Data Attribution for Human-Centered Explainable AI
Elisa Nguyen, Johannes Bertram, Evgenii Kortukov, Jean Y. Song, Seong Joon Oh
While Explainable AI (XAI) aims to make AI understandable and useful to humans, it has been criticised for relying too much on formalism and solutionism, focusing more on mathematical soundness than user needs. We propose an alternative to this bottom-up approach inspired by design thinking: the XAI research community should adopt a top-down, user-focused perspective to ensure user relevance. We illustrate this with a relatively young subfield of XAI, Training Data Attribution (TDA). With the surge in TDA research and growing competition, the field risks repeating the same patterns of solutionism. We conducted a needfinding study with a diverse group of AI practitioners to identify potential user needs related to TDA. Through interviews (N=10) and a systematic survey (N=31), we uncovered new TDA tasks that are currently largely overlooked. We invite the TDA and XAI communities to consider these novel tasks and improve the user relevance of their research outcomes.
Read more9/26/2024
0
Explainable AI needs formal notions of explanation correctness
Stefan Haufe, Rick Wilming, Benedict Clark, Rustam Zhumagambetov, Danny Panknin, Ahc`ene Boubekki
The use of machine learning (ML) in critical domains such as medicine poses risks and requires regulation. One requirement is that decisions of ML systems in high-risk applications should be human-understandable. The field of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) seemingly addresses this need. However, in its current form, XAI is unfit to provide quality control for ML; it itself needs scrutiny. Popular XAI methods cannot reliably answer important questions about ML models, their training data, or a given test input. We recapitulate results demonstrating that popular XAI methods systematically attribute importance to input features that are independent of the prediction target. This limits their utility for purposes such as model and data (in)validation, model improvement, and scientific discovery. We argue that the fundamental reason for this limitation is that current XAI methods do not address well-defined problems and are not evaluated against objective criteria of explanation correctness. Researchers should formally define the problems they intend to solve first and then design methods accordingly. This will lead to notions of explanation correctness that can be theoretically verified and objective metrics of explanation performance that can be assessed using ground-truth data.
Read more9/27/2024
0
Explainable Artificial Intelligence: A Survey of Needs, Techniques, Applications, and Future Direction
Melkamu Mersha, Khang Lam, Joseph Wood, Ali AlShami, Jugal Kalita
Artificial intelligence models encounter significant challenges due to their black-box nature, particularly in safety-critical domains such as healthcare, finance, and autonomous vehicles. Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) addresses these challenges by providing explanations for how these models make decisions and predictions, ensuring transparency, accountability, and fairness. Existing studies have examined the fundamental concepts of XAI, its general principles, and the scope of XAI techniques. However, there remains a gap in the literature as there are no comprehensive reviews that delve into the detailed mathematical representations, design methodologies of XAI models, and other associated aspects. This paper provides a comprehensive literature review encompassing common terminologies and definitions, the need for XAI, beneficiaries of XAI, a taxonomy of XAI methods, and the application of XAI methods in different application areas. The survey is aimed at XAI researchers, XAI practitioners, AI model developers, and XAI beneficiaries who are interested in enhancing the trustworthiness, transparency, accountability, and fairness of their AI models.
Read more10/4/2024
0
The future of human-centric eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) is not post-hoc explanations
Vinitra Swamy, Jibril Frej, Tanja Kaser
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) plays a crucial role in enabling human understanding and trust in deep learning systems. As models get larger, more ubiquitous, and pervasive in aspects of daily life, explainability is necessary to minimize adverse effects of model mistakes. Unfortunately, current approaches in human-centric XAI (e.g. predictive tasks in healthcare, education, or personalized ads) tend to rely on a single post-hoc explainer, whereas recent work has identified systematic disagreement between post-hoc explainers when applied to the same instances of underlying black-box models. In this paper, we therefore present a call for action to address the limitations of current state-of-the-art explainers. We propose a shift from post-hoc explainability to designing interpretable neural network architectures. We identify five needs of human-centric XAI (real-time, accurate, actionable, human-interpretable, and consistent) and propose two schemes for interpretable-by-design neural network workflows (adaptive routing with InterpretCC and temporal diagnostics with I2MD). We postulate that the future of human-centric XAI is neither in explaining black-boxes nor in reverting to traditional, interpretable models, but in neural networks that are intrinsically interpretable.
Read more5/29/2024