Research Papers

Evaluating the Faithfulness of Saliency-based Explanations for Deep Learning Models for Temporal Colour Constancy

Matteo Rizzo, Cristina Conati, Daesik Jang +1

The opacity of deep learning models constrains their debugging and improvement. Augmenting deep models with saliency-based strategies, such as attention, has been claimed to help get a better understanding of the decision-making process of black-box models. However, some recent works challenged saliency's faithfulness in the field of Natural Language Processing (NLP), questioning attention weights' adherence to the true decision-making process of the model. We add to this discussion by evaluating the faithfulness of in-model saliency applied to a video processing task for the first time, namely, temporal colour constancy. We perform the evaluation by adapting to our target task two tests for faithfulness from recent NLP literature, whose methodology we refine as part of our contributions. We show that attention fails to achieve faithfulness, while confidence, a particular type of in-model visual saliency, succeeds.

Human lives are increasingly being affected by the outcomes of automated decision-making systems and it is essential for the latter to be, not only accurate, but also fair. The literature of algorithmic fairness has grown considerably over the last decade, where most of the approaches are evaluated under the strong assumption that the train and test samples are independently and identically drawn from the same underlying distribution. However, in practice, dissimilarity between the training and deployment environments exists, which compromises the performance of the decision-making algorithm as well as its fairness guarantees in the deployment data. There is an emergent research line that studies how to preserve fairness guarantees when the data generating processes differ between the source (train) and target (test) domains, which is growing remarkably. With this survey, we aim to provide a wide and unifying overview on the topic. For such purpose, we propose a taxonomy of the existing approaches for fair classification under distribution shift, highlight benchmarking alternatives, point out the relation with other similar research fields and eventually, identify future venues of research.

Although prediction models for delirium, a commonly occurring condition during general hospitalization or post-surgery, have not gained huge popularity, their algorithmic bias evaluation is crucial due to the existing association between social determinants of health and delirium risk. In this context, using MIMIC-III and another academic hospital dataset, we present some initial experimental evidence showing how sociodemographic features such as sex and race can impact the model performance across subgroups. With this work, our intent is to initiate a discussion about the intersectionality effects of old age, race and socioeconomic factors on the early-stage detection and prevention of delirium using ML.

The 4th Industrial Revolution is the culmination of the digital age. Nowadays, technologies such as robotics, nanotechnology, genetics, and artificial intelligence promise to transform our world and the way we live. Artificial Intelligence Ethics and Safety is an emerging research field that has been gaining popularity in recent years. Several private, public and non-governmental organizations have published guidelines proposing ethical principles for regulating the use and development of autonomous intelligent systems. Meta-analyses of the AI Ethics research field point to convergence on certain principles that supposedly govern the AI industry. However, little is known about the effectiveness of this form of Ethics. In this paper, we would like to conduct a critical analysis of the current state of AI Ethics and suggest that this form of governance based on principled ethical guidelines is not sufficient to norm the AI industry and its developers. We believe that drastic changes are necessary, both in the training processes of professionals in the fields related to the development of software and intelligent systems and in the increased regulation of these professionals and their industry. To this end, we suggest that law should benefit from recent contributions from bioethics, to make the contributions of AI ethics to governance explicit in legal terms.

Convolutional neural networks (CNN) are known for their excellent feature extraction capabilities to enable the learning of models from data, yet are used as black boxes. An interpretation of the convolutional filtres and associated features can help to establish an understanding of CNN to distinguish various classes. In this work, we focus on the explainability of a CNN model called as cnnexplain that is used for Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 classification with a focus on the interpretability of features by the convolutional filters, and how these features contribute to classification. Specifically, we have used various explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods, such as visualizations, SmoothGrad, Grad-CAM, and LIME to provide interpretation of convolutional filtres, and relevant features, and their role in classification. We have analyzed the explanation of these methods for Covid-19 detection using dry cough spectrograms. Explanation results obtained from the LIME, SmoothGrad, and Grad-CAM highlight important features of different spectrograms and their relevance to classification.

More Data Can Lead Us Astray: Active Data Acquisition in the Presence of Label Bias

Yunyi Li, Maria De-Arteaga, Maytal Saar-Tsechansky

An increased awareness concerning risks of algorithmic bias has driven a surge of efforts around bias mitigation strategies. A vast majority of the proposed approaches fall under one of two categories: (1) imposing algorithmic fairness constraints on predictive models, and (2) collecting additional training samples. Most recently and at the intersection of these two categories, methods that propose active learning under fairness constraints have been developed. However, proposed bias mitigation strategies typically overlook the bias presented in the observed labels. In this work, we study fairness considerations of active data collection strategies in the presence of label bias. We first present an overview of different types of label bias in the context of supervised learning systems. We then empirically show that, when overlooking label bias, collecting more data can aggravate bias, and imposing fairness constraints that rely on the observed labels in the data collection process may not address the problem. Our results illustrate the unintended consequences of deploying a model that attempts to mitigate a single type of bias while neglecting others, emphasizing the importance of explicitly differentiating between the types of bias that fairness-aware algorithms aim to address, and highlighting the risks of neglecting label bias during data collection.

In this position paper, we propose building a broader and deeper understanding around Explainability in AI by 'grounding' it in social contexts, the socio-technical systems operate in. We situate our understanding of grounded explainability in the 'Global South' in general and India in particular and express the need for more research within the global south context when it comes to explainability and AI.

There is a growing debate amongst academics and practitioners on whether interventions made, thus far, towards Responsible AI would have been enough to engage with root causes of AI problems. Failure to effect meaningful changes in this system could see these initiatives to not reach their potential and lead to the concept becoming another buzzword for companies to use in their marketing campaigns. We propose that there is an opportunity to improve the extent to which interventions are understood to be effective in their contribution to the change required for Responsible AI. Using the notions of leverage zones adapted from the 'Systems Thinking' literature, we suggest a novel approach to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, to focus on those that may bring about the real change that is needed. In this paper we argue that insights from using this perspective demonstrate that the majority of current initiatives taken by various actors in the field, focus on low-order interventions, such as short-term fixes, tweaking algorithms and updating parameters, absent from higher-order interventions, such as redefining the system's foundational structures that govern those parameters, or challenging the underlying purpose upon which those structures are built and developed in the first place(high-leverage). This paper presents a conceptual framework called the Five Ps to identify interventions towards Responsible AI and provides a scaffold for transdisciplinary question asking to improve outcomes towards Responsible AI.

White Blood Cell (WBC) Leukaemia is detected through image-based classification. Convolutional Neural Networks are used to learn the features needed to classify images of cells a malignant or healthy. However, this type of model requires learning a large number of parameters and is difficult to interpret and explain. Explainable AI (XAI) attempts to alleviate this issue by providing insights to how models make decisions. Therefore, we present an XAI model which uses only 24 explainable and interpretable features and is highly competitive to other approaches by outperforming them by about 4.38\%. Further, our approach provides insight into which variables are the most important for the classification of the cells. This insight provides evidence that when labs treat the WBCs differently, the importance of various metrics changes substantially. Understanding the important features for classification is vital in medical imaging diagnosis and, by extension, understanding the AI models built in scientific pursuits.

Deep learning has become popular because of its potential to achieve high accuracy in prediction tasks. However, accuracy is not always the only goal of statistical modelling, especially for models developed as part of scientific research. Rather, many scientific models are developed to facilitate scientific discovery, by which we mean to abstract a human-understandable representation of the natural world. Unfortunately, the opacity of deep neural networks limit their role in scientific discovery, creating a new demand for models that are transparently interpretable. This article is a field guide to transparent model design. It provides a taxonomy of transparent model design concepts, a practical workflow for putting design concepts into practice, and a general template for reporting design choices. We hope this field guide will help researchers more effectively design transparently interpretable models, and thus enable them to use deep learning for scientific discovery.

There is a struggle in Artificial intelligence (AI) ethics to gain ground in actionable methods and models to be utilized by practitioners while developing and implementing ethically sound AI systems. AI ethics is a vague concept without a consensus of definition or theoretical grounding and bearing little connection to practice. Practice involving primarily technical tasks like software development is not aptly equipped to process and decide upon ethical considerations. Efforts to create tools and guidelines to help people working with AI development have been concentrating almost solely on the technical aspects of AI. A few exceptions do apply, such as the ECCOLA method for creating ethically aligned AI -systems. ECCOLA has proven results in terms of increased ethical considerations in AI systems development. Yet, it is a novel innovation, and room for development still exists. This study aims to extend ECCOLA with a deployment model to drive the adoption of ECCOLA, as any method, no matter how good, is of no value without adoption and use. The model includes simple metrics to facilitate the communication of ethical gaps or outcomes of ethical AI development. It offers the opportunity to assess any AI system at any given lifecycle phase, e.g., opening possibilities like analyzing the ethicality of an AI system under acquisition.

Algorithmic bias is of increasing concern, both to the research community, and society at large. Bias in AI is more abstract and unintuitive than traditional forms of discrimination and can be more difficult to detect and mitigate. A clear gap exists in the current literature on evaluating the relative bias in the performance of multi-class classifiers. In this work, we propose two simple yet effective metrics, Combined Error Variance (CEV) and Symmetric Distance Error (SDE), to quantitatively evaluate the class-wise bias of two models in comparison to one another. By evaluating the performance of these new metrics and by demonstrating their practical application, we show that they can be used to measure fairness as well as bias. These demonstrations show that our metrics can address specific needs for measuring bias in multi-class classification.