Research Papers

Towards Explaining STEM Document Classification using Mathematical Entity Linking

Philipp Scharpf, Moritz Schubotz, Bela Gipp

Document subject classification is essential for structuring (digital) libraries and allowing readers to search within a specific field. Currently, the classification is typically made by human domain experts. Semi-supervised Machine Learning algorithms can support them by exploiting the labeled data to predict subject classes for unclassified new documents. However, while humans partly do, machines mostly do not explain the reasons for their decisions. Recently, explainable AI research to address the problem of Machine Learning decisions being a black box has increasingly gained interest. Explainer models have already been applied to the classification of natural language texts, such as legal or medical documents. Documents from Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines are more difficult to analyze, since they contain both textual and mathematical formula content. In this paper, we present first advances towards STEM document classification explainability using classical and mathematical Entity Linking. We examine relationships between textual and mathematical subject classes and entities, mining a collection of documents from the arXiv preprint repository (NTCIR and zbMATH dataset). The results indicate that mathematical entities have the potential to provide high explainability as they are a crucial part of a STEM document.

Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is one of the leading causes of permanent vision loss in people aged over 60 years. Accurate segmentation of biomarkers such as drusen that points to the early stages of AMD is crucial in preventing further vision impairment. However, segmenting drusen is extremely challenging due to their varied sizes and appearances, low contrast and noise resemblance. Most existing literature, therefore, have focused on size estimation of drusen using classification, leaving the challenge of accurate segmentation less tackled. Additionally, obtaining the pixel-wise annotations is extremely costly and such labels can often be noisy, suffering from inter-observer and intra-observer variability. Quantification of uncertainty associated with segmentation tasks offers principled measures to inspect the segmentation output. Realizing its utility in identifying erroneous segmentation and the potential applications in clinical decision making, here we develop a U-Net based drusen segmentation model and quantify the segmentation uncertainty. We investigate epistemic and aleatoric uncertainty capturing model confidence and data uncertainty respectively. We present segmentation results and show how uncertainty can help formulate robust evaluation strategies. We visually inspect the pixel-wise uncertainty and segmentation results on test images. We finally analyze the correlation between segmentation uncertainty and accuracy. Our results demonstrate the utility of leveraging uncertainties in developing and explaining segmentation models for medical image analysis.

Descriptive AI Ethics: Collecting and Understanding the Public Opinion

Gabriel Lima, Meeyoung Cha

There is a growing need for data-driven research efforts on how the public perceives the ethical, moral, and legal issues of autonomous AI systems. The current debate on the responsibility gap posed by these systems is one such example. This work proposes a mixed AI ethics model that allows normative and descriptive research to complement each other, by aiding scholarly discussion with data gathered from the public. We discuss its implications on bridging the gap between optimistic and pessimistic views towards AI systems' deployment.

Supervised classification can be effective for prediction but sometimes weak on interpretability or explainability (XAI). Clustering, on the other hand, tends to isolate categories or profiles that can be meaningful but there is no guarantee that they are useful for labels prediction. Predictive clustering seeks to obtain the best of the two worlds. Starting from labeled data, it looks for clusters that are as pure as possible with regards to the class labels. One technique consists in tweaking a clustering algorithm so that data points sharing the same label tend to aggregate together. With distance-based algorithms, such as k-means, a solution is to modify the distance used by the algorithm so that it incorporates information about the labels of the data points. In this paper, we propose another method which relies on a change of representation guided by class densities and then carries out clustering in this new representation space. We present two new algorithms using this technique and show on a variety of data sets that they are competitive for prediction performance with pure supervised classifiers while offering interpretability of the clusters discovered.

The 2nd edition of the Montreal AI Ethics Institute's The State of AI Ethics captures the most relevant developments in the field of AI Ethics since July 2020. This report aims to help anyone, from machine learning experts to human rights activists and policymakers, quickly digest and understand the ever-changing developments in the field. Through research and article summaries, as well as expert commentary, this report distills the research and reporting surrounding various domains related to the ethics of AI, including: AI and society, bias and algorithmic justice, disinformation, humans and AI, labor impacts, privacy, risk, and future of AI ethics. In addition, The State of AI Ethics includes exclusive content written by world-class AI Ethics experts from universities, research institutes, consulting firms, and governments. These experts include: Danit Gal (Tech Advisor, United Nations), Amba Kak (Director of Global Policy and Programs, NYU's AI Now Institute), Rumman Chowdhury (Global Lead for Responsible AI, Accenture), Brent Barron (Director of Strategic Projects and Knowledge Management, CIFAR), Adam Murray (U.S. Diplomat working on tech policy, Chair of the OECD Network on AI), Thomas Kochan (Professor, MIT Sloan School of Management), and Katya Klinova (AI and Economy Program Lead, Partnership on AI). This report should be used not only as a point of reference and insight on the latest thinking in the field of AI Ethics, but should also be used as a tool for introspection as we aim to foster a more nuanced conversation regarding the impacts of AI on the world.

Today, Artificial Intelligence (AI) has a direct impact on the daily life of billions of people. Being applied to sectors like finance, health, security and advertisement, AI fuels some of the biggest companies and research institutions in the world. Its impact in the near future seems difficult to predict or bound. In contrast to all this power, society remains mostly ignorant of the capabilities and standard practices of AI today. To address this imbalance, improving current interactions between people and AI systems, we propose a transparency scheme to be implemented on any AI system open to the public. The scheme is based on two pillars: Data Privacy and AI Transparency. The first recognizes the relevance of data for AI, and is supported by GDPR. The second considers aspects of AI transparency currently unregulated: AI capabilities, purpose and source. We design this pillar based on ethical principles. For each of the two pillars, we define a three-level display. The first level is based on visual signs, inspired by traffic signs managing the interaction between people and cars, and designed for quick and universal interpretability. The second level uses factsheets, providing limited details. The last level provides access to all available information. After detailing and exemplifying the proposed transparency scheme, we define a set of principles for creating transparent by design software, to be used during the integration of AI components on user-oriented services.

Argumentation-based Agents that Explain their Decisions

Mariela Morveli-Espinoza, Ayslan Possebom, Cesar Augusto Tacla

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) systems, including intelligent agents, must be able to explain their internal decisions, behaviours and reasoning that produce their choices to the humans (or other systems) with which they interact. In this paper, we focus on how an extended model of BDI (Beliefs-Desires-Intentions) agents can be able to generate explanations about their reasoning, specifically, about the goals he decides to commit to. Our proposal is based on argumentation theory, we use arguments to represent the reasons that lead an agent to make a decision and use argumentation semantics to determine acceptable arguments (reasons). We propose two types of explanations: the partial one and the complete one. We apply our proposal to a scenario of rescue robots.

The field of transparent Machine Learning (ML) has contributed many novel methods aiming at better interpretability for computer vision and ML models in general. But how useful the explanations provided by transparent ML methods are for humans remains difficult to assess. Most studies evaluate interpretability in qualitative comparisons, they use experimental paradigms that do not allow for direct comparisons amongst methods or they report only offline experiments with no humans in the loop. While there are clear advantages of evaluations with no humans in the loop, such as scalability, reproducibility and less algorithmic bias than with humans in the loop, these metrics are limited in their usefulness if we do not understand how they relate to other metrics that take human cognition into account. Here we investigate the quality of interpretable computer vision algorithms using techniques from psychophysics. In crowdsourced annotation tasks we study the impact of different interpretability approaches on annotation accuracy and task time. In order to relate these findings to quality measures for interpretability without humans in the loop we compare quality metrics with and without humans in the loop. Our results demonstrate that psychophysical experiments allow for robust quality assessment of transparency in machine learning. Interestingly the quality metrics computed without humans in the loop did not provide a consistent ranking of interpretability methods nor were they representative for how useful an explanation was for humans. These findings highlight the potential of methods from classical psychophysics for modern machine learning applications. We hope that our results provide convincing arguments for evaluating interpretability in its natural habitat, human-ML interaction, if the goal is to obtain an authentic assessment of interpretability.

Neural network interpretability is a vital component for applications across a wide variety of domains. In such cases it is often useful to analyze a network which has already been trained for its specific purpose. In this work, we develop a method to produce explanation masks for pre-trained networks. The mask localizes the most important aspects of each input for prediction of the original network. Masks are created by a secondary network whose goal is to create as small an explanation as possible while still preserving the predictive accuracy of the original network. We demonstrate the applicability of our method for image classification with CNNs, sentiment analysis with RNNs, and chemical property prediction with mixed CNN/RNN architectures.

Most explainable AI (XAI) techniques are concerned with the design of algorithms to explain the AI's decision. However, the data that is used to train these algorithms may contain features that are often incomprehensible to an end-user even with the best XAI algorithms. Thus, the problem of explainability has to be addressed starting right from the data creation step. In this paper, we studied this problem considering the use-case of explaining loan denials to end-users as opposed to AI engineers or domain experts. Motivated by the lack of datasets that are representative of user-friendly explanations, we build the first-of-its-kind dataset that is representative of user-friendly explanations for loan denials. The paper shares some of the insights gained in curating the dataset. First, existing datasets seldom contain features that end users consider as acceptable in understanding a model's decision. Second, understanding of the explanation's context such as the human-in-the-loop seeking the explanation, and the purpose for which an explanation is sought, aids in the creation of user-friendly datasets. Thus, our dataset, which we call Xnet, also contains explanations that serve different purposes: those that educate the loan applicants, and help them take appropriate action towards a future approval. We hope this work will trigger the creation of new user friendly datasets, and serve as a guide for the curation of such datasets.

Understanding how cities visually differ from each others is interesting for planners, residents, and historians. We investigate the interpretation of deep features learned by convolutional neural networks (CNNs) for city recognition. Given a trained city recognition network, we first generate weighted masks using the known Grad-CAM technique and to select the most discriminate regions in the image. Since the image classification label is the city name, it contains no information of objects that are class-discriminate, we investigate the interpretability of deep representations with two methods. (i) Unsupervised method is used to cluster the objects appearing in the visual explanations. (ii) A pretrained semantic segmentation model is used to label objects in pixel level, and then we introduce statistical measures to quantitatively evaluate the interpretability of discriminate objects. The influence of network architectures and random initializations in training, is studied on the interpretability of CNN features for city recognition. The results suggest that network architectures would affect the interpretability of learned visual representations greater than different initializations.

Current AI safety discourse still focuses disproportionately on visible failures, including obvious harms, dramatic misuse, and hypothetical catastrophic scenarios. That focus is incomplete. In deployed systems, many of the most consequential failures are quieter: plausible rather than spectacular, distributed across components rather than localized in a single output, and normalized by workflows before they are recognized as hazards. We argue that a central safety challenge in modern AI systems is increasingly not only whether a model emits a harmful response, but whether the broader socio-technical system preserves the conditions under which errors remain visible, contestable, containable, and recoverable. We propose a five-layer framework for diagnosing these hidden risks: (1) epistemic integrity, concerning whether evidence and uncertainty are represented honestly enough to support calibrated reliance; (2) control integrity, concerning whether authority, permissions, and action boundaries remain robust under attack and optimization; (3) temporal integrity, concerning whether safety holds across sessions, memory updates, and deployment drift; (4) organizational integrity, concerning whether institutions retain the capacity to audit, assign responsibility, and intervene effectively; and (5) ecosystem integrity, concerning whether AI systems preserve rather than erode the information environment on which future oversight depends. Across these layers, we identify under-recognized risk patterns, including overreliance, uncertainty and legitimacy laundering in retrieval, prompt injection, reward hacking, memory poisoning, evaluation deception, fictional human oversight, synthetic evidence pollution, and model collapse. We conclude with design and governance recommendations and a research agenda for shifting AI safety from model-centric evaluation toward socio-technical reliability.