Responsible AI research from arXiv, ranked by citations from
Semantic Scholar (
Allen AI ), and enriched with key takeaways
4,071 papers in 1 topic
Changqi Sun, Hao Xu, Yuntian Chen +1
Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims to develop transparent explanatory approaches for "black-box" deep learning models. However,it remains difficult for existing methods to achieve the trade-off of the three key criteria in interpretability, namely, reliability, causality, and usability, which hinder their practical applications. In this paper, we propose a self-supervised automatic semantic interpretable explainable artificial intelligence (AS-XAI) framework, which utilizes transparent orthogonal embedding semantic extraction spaces and row-centered principal component analysis (PCA) for global semantic interpretation of model decisions in the absence of human interference, without additional computational costs. In addition, the invariance of filter feature high-rank decomposition is used to evaluate model sensitivity to different semantic concepts. Extensive experiments demonstrate that robust and orthogonal semantic spaces can be automatically extracted by AS-XAI, providing more effective global interpretability for convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and generating human-comprehensible explanations. The proposed approach offers broad fine-grained extensible practical applications, including shared semantic interpretation under out-of-distribution (OOD) categories, auxiliary explanations for species that are challenging to distinguish, and classification explanations from various perspectives.
Alexander Tapley, Kyle Gatesman, Luis Robaina +2
Explainable Reinforcement Learning (XRL) can provide transparency into the decision-making process of a Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) model and increase user trust and adoption in real-world use cases. By utilizing XRL techniques, researchers can identify potential vulnerabilities within a trained DRL model prior to deployment, therefore limiting the potential for mission failure or mistakes by the system. This paper introduces the ARLIN (Assured RL Model Interrogation) Toolkit, an open-source Python library that identifies potential vulnerabilities and critical points within trained DRL models through detailed, human-interpretable explainability outputs. To illustrate ARLIN's effectiveness, we provide explainability visualizations and vulnerability analysis for a publicly available DRL model. The open-source code repository is available for download at https://github.com/mitre/arlin.
Pallavi Bagga, Kostas Stathis
This paper bridges the gap between mathematical heuristic strategies learned from Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) in automated agent negotiation, and comprehensible, natural language explanations. Our aim is to make these strategies more accessible to non-experts. By leveraging traditional Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques and Large Language Models (LLMs) equipped with Transformers, we outline how parts of DRL strategies composed of parts within strategy templates can be transformed into user-friendly, human-like English narratives. To achieve this, we present a top-level algorithm that involves parsing mathematical expressions of strategy templates, semantically interpreting variables and structures, generating rule-based primary explanations, and utilizing a Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) model to refine and contextualize these explanations. Subsequent customization for varied audiences and meticulous validation processes in an example illustrate the applicability and potential of this approach.
AKM Bahalul Haque, A. K. M. Najmul Islam, Patrick Mikalef
The growing attention to artificial intelligence-based applications has led to research interest in explainability issues. This emerging research attention on explainable AI (XAI) advocates the need to investigate end user-centric explainable AI. Thus, this study aims to investigate usercentric explainable AI and considered recommendation systems as the study context. We conducted focus group interviews to collect qualitative data on the recommendation system. We asked participants about the end users' comprehension of a recommended item, its probable explanation, and their opinion of making a recommendation explainable. Our findings reveal that end users want a non-technical and tailor-made explanation with on-demand supplementary information. Moreover, we also observed users requiring an explanation about personal data usage, detailed user feedback, and authentic and reliable explanations. Finally, we propose a synthesized framework that aims at involving the end user in the development process for requirements collection and validation.
Romain Xu-Darme, Jenny Benois-Pineau, Romain Giot +4
In the field of Explainable AI, multiples evaluation metrics have been proposed in order to assess the quality of explanation methods w.r.t. a set of desired properties. In this work, we study the articulation between the stability, correctness and plausibility of explanations based on feature importance for image classifiers. We show that the existing metrics for evaluating these properties do not always agree, raising the issue of what constitutes a good evaluation metric for explanations. Finally, in the particular case of stability and correctness, we show the possible limitations of some evaluation metrics and propose new ones that take into account the local behaviour of the model under test.
Qiang Li, Dan Zhang, Shengzhao Lei +5
Despite the promising performance of existing visual models on public benchmarks, the critical assessment of their robustness for real-world applications remains an ongoing challenge. To bridge this gap, we propose an explainable visual dataset, XIMAGENET-12, to evaluate the robustness of visual models. XIMAGENET-12 consists of over 200K images with 15,410 manual semantic annotations. Specifically, we deliberately selected 12 categories from ImageNet, representing objects commonly encountered in practical life. To simulate real-world situations, we incorporated six diverse scenarios, such as overexposure, blurring, and color changes, etc. We further develop a quantitative criterion for robustness assessment, allowing for a nuanced understanding of how visual models perform under varying conditions, notably in relation to the background. We make the XIMAGENET-12 dataset and its corresponding code openly accessible at \url{https://sites.google.com/view/ximagenet-12/home}. We expect the introduction of the XIMAGENET-12 dataset will empower researchers to thoroughly evaluate the robustness of their visual models under challenging conditions.
Adam Rida, Marie-Jeanne Lesot, Xavier Renard +1
Explainable AI (XAI) methods have mostly been built to investigate and shed light on single machine learning models and are not designed to capture and explain differences between multiple models effectively. This paper addresses the challenge of understanding and explaining differences between machine learning models, which is crucial for model selection, monitoring and lifecycle management in real-world applications. We propose DeltaXplainer, a model-agnostic method for generating rule-based explanations describing the differences between two binary classifiers. To assess the effectiveness of DeltaXplainer, we conduct experiments on synthetic and real-world datasets, covering various model comparison scenarios involving different types of concept drift.
Amit Harlev, Andrew Engel, Panos Stinis +1
Understanding feature representation for deep neural networks (DNNs) remains an open question within the general field of explainable AI. We use principal component analysis (PCA) to study the performance of a k-nearest neighbors classifier (k-NN), nearest class-centers classifier (NCC), and support vector machines on the learned layer-wise representations of a ResNet-18 trained on CIFAR-10. We show that in certain layers, as little as 20% of the intermediate feature-space variance is necessary for high-accuracy classification and that across all layers, the first ~100 PCs completely determine the performance of the k-NN and NCC classifiers. We relate our findings to neural collapse and provide partial evidence for the related phenomenon of intermediate neural collapse. Our preliminary work provides three distinct yet interpretable surrogate models for feature representation with an affine linear model the best performing. We also show that leveraging several surrogate models affords us a clever method to estimate where neural collapse may initially occur within the DNN.
Marianne Bossema, Rob Saunders, Somaya Ben Allouch
This position paper is part of a long-term research project on human-machine co-creativity with older adults. The goal is to investigate how robots and AI-generated content can contribute to older adults' creative experiences, with a focus on collaborative drawing and painting. The research has recently started, and current activities are centred around literature studies, interviews with seniors and artists, and developing initial prototypes. In addition, a course "Drawing with Robots", is being developed to establish collaboration between human and machine learners: older adults, artists, students, researchers, and artificial agents. We present this course as a learning community and as an opportunity for studying how explainable AI and creative dialogues can be intertwined in human-machine co-creativity with older adults.
Vincent Lemaire, Nathan Le Boudec, Victor Guyomard +1
There are now many explainable AI methods for understanding the decisions of a machine learning model. Among these are those based on counterfactual reasoning, which involve simulating features changes and observing the impact on the prediction. This article proposes to view this simulation process as a source of creating a certain amount of knowledge that can be stored to be used, later, in different ways. This process is illustrated in the additive model and, more specifically, in the case of the naive Bayes classifier, whose interesting properties for this purpose are shown.
Yulu Pi
The rapidly advancing domain of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) has sparked significant interests in developing techniques to make AI systems more transparent and understandable. Nevertheless, in real-world contexts, the methods of explainability and their evaluation strategies present numerous limitations.Moreover, the scope of responsible AI extends beyond just explainability. In this paper, we explore these limitations and discuss their implications in a boarder context of responsible AI when considering other important aspects, including privacy, fairness and contestability.
Patrick Rehill, Nicholas Biddle
Causal machine learning methods which flexibly generate heterogeneous treatment effect estimates could be very useful tools for governments trying to make and implement policy. However, as the critical artificial intelligence literature has shown, governments must be very careful of unintended consequences when using machine learning models. One way to try and protect against unintended bad outcomes is with AI Fairness methods which seek to create machine learning models where sensitive variables like race or gender do not influence outcomes. In this paper we argue that standard AI Fairness approaches developed for predictive machine learning are not suitable for all causal machine learning applications because causal machine learning generally (at least so far) uses modelling to inform a human who is the ultimate decision-maker while AI Fairness approaches assume a model that is making decisions directly. We define these scenarios as indirect and direct decision-making respectively and suggest that policy-making is best seen as a joint decision where the causal machine learning model usually only has indirect power. We lay out a definition of fairness for this scenario - a model that provides the information a decision-maker needs to accurately make a value judgement about just policy outcomes - and argue that the complexity of causal machine learning models can make this difficult to achieve. The solution here is not traditional AI Fairness adjustments, but careful modelling and awareness of some of the decision-making biases that these methods might encourage which we describe.
74% published 2023+
26
Avg
309
100+
18
1K+
6,810
Total
Excl. arXiv-only (2,998)