Research Papers

If a prediction model identifies vulnerable individuals or groups, the use of that model may become an ethical issue. But can we know that this is what a model does? Machine learning fairness as a field is focused on the just treatment of individuals and groups under information processing with machine learning methods. While considerable attention has been given to mitigating discrimination of protected groups, vulnerable groups have not received the same attention. Unlike protected groups, which can be regarded as always vulnerable, a vulnerable group may be vulnerable in one context but not in another. This raises new challenges on how and when to protect vulnerable individuals and groups under machine learning. Methods from explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), in contrast, do consider more contextual issues and are concerned with answering the question "why was this decision made?". Neither existing fairness nor existing explainability methods allow us to ascertain if a prediction model identifies vulnerability. We discuss this problem and propose approaches for analysing prediction models in this respect.

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.

We introduce a data-driven, model-agnostic technique for generating a human-interpretable summary of the salient points of contrast within an evolving dynamical system, such as the learning process of a control agent. It involves the aggregation of transition data along both spatial and temporal dimensions according to an information-theoretic divergence measure. A practical algorithm is outlined for continuous state spaces, and deployed to summarise the learning histories of deep reinforcement learning agents with the aid of graphical and textual communication methods. We expect our method to be complementary to existing techniques in the realm of agent interpretability.

Unexplainable black-box models create scenarios where anomalies cause deleterious responses, thus creating unacceptable risks. These risks have motivated the field of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) to improve trust by evaluating local interpretability in black-box neural networks. Unfortunately, the ground truth is unavailable for the model's decision, so evaluation is limited to qualitative assessment. Further, interpretability may lead to inaccurate conclusions about the model or a false sense of trust. We propose to improve XAI from the vantage point of the user's trust by exploring a black-box model's latent feature space. We present an approach, ProtoShotXAI, that uses a Prototypical few-shot network to explore the contrastive manifold between nonlinear features of different classes. A user explores the manifold by perturbing the input features of a query sample and recording the response for a subset of exemplars from any class. Our approach is the first locally interpretable XAI model that can be extended to, and demonstrated on, few-shot networks. We compare ProtoShotXAI to the state-of-the-art XAI approaches on MNIST, Omniglot, and ImageNet to demonstrate, both quantitatively and qualitatively, that ProtoShotXAI provides more flexibility for model exploration. Finally, ProtoShotXAI also demonstrates novel explainabilty and detectabilty on adversarial samples.

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.

When Stability meets Sufficiency: Informative Explanations that do not Overwhelm

Ronny Luss, Amit Dhurandhar

Recent studies evaluating various criteria for explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) suggest that fidelity, stability, and comprehensibility are among the most important metrics considered by users of AI across a diverse collection of usage contexts. We consider these criteria as applied to feature-based attribution methods, which are amongst the most prevalent in XAI literature. Going beyond standard correlation, methods have been proposed that highlight what should be minimally sufficient to justify the classification of an input (viz. pertinent positives). While minimal sufficiency is an attractive property akin to comprehensibility, the resulting explanations are often too sparse for a human to understand and evaluate the local behavior of the model. To overcome these limitations, we incorporate the criteria of stability and fidelity and propose a novel method called Path-Sufficient Explanations Method (PSEM) that outputs a sequence of stable and sufficient explanations for a given input of strictly decreasing size (or value) -- from original input to a minimally sufficient explanation -- which can be thought to trace the local boundary of the model in a stable manner, thus providing better intuition about the local model behavior for the specific input. We validate these claims, both qualitatively and quantitatively, with experiments that show the benefit of PSEM across three modalities (image, tabular and text) as well as versus other path explanations. A user study depicts the strength of the method in communicating the local behavior, where (many) users are able to correctly determine the prediction made by a model.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly more popular and can be found in workplaces and homes around the world. The decisions made by such "black box" systems are often opaque; that is, so complex as to be functionally impossible to understand. How do we ensure that these systems are behaving as desired? TrustyAI is an initiative which looks into explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) solutions to address this issue of explainability in the context of both AI models and decision services. This paper presents the TrustyAI Explainability Toolkit, a Java and Python library that provides XAI explanations of decision services and predictive models for both enterprise and data science use-cases. We describe the TrustyAI implementations and extensions to techniques such as LIME, SHAP and counterfactuals, which are benchmarked against existing implementations in a variety of experiments.

Explainable AI (XAI) methods focus on explaining what a neural network has learned - in other words, identifying the features that are the most influential to the prediction. In this paper, we call them "distinguishing features". However, whether a human can make sense of the generated explanation also depends on the perceptibility of these features to humans. To make sure an explanation is human-understandable, we argue that the capabilities of humans, constrained by the Human Visual System (HVS) and psychophysics, need to be taken into account. We propose the {\em human perceptibility principle for XAI}, stating that, to generate human-understandable explanations, neural networks should be steered towards focusing on human-understandable cues during training. We conduct a case study regarding the classification of real vs. fake face images, where many of the distinguishing features picked up by standard neural networks turn out not to be perceptible to humans. By applying the proposed principle, a neural network with human-understandable explanations is trained which, in a user study, is shown to better align with human intuition. This is likely to make the AI more trustworthy and opens the door to humans learning from machines. In the case study, we specifically investigate and analyze the behaviour of the human-imperceptible high spatial frequency features in neural networks and XAI methods.

Researchers and practitioners increasingly consider a human-centered perspective in the design of machine learning-based applications, especially in the context of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). However, clear methodological guidance in this context is still missing because each new situation seems to require a new setup, which also creates different methodological challenges. Existing case study collections in XAI inspired us; therefore, we propose a similar collection of case studies for human-centered XAI that can provide methodological guidance or inspiration for others. We want to showcase our idea in this workshop by describing three case studies from our research. These case studies are selected to highlight how apparently small differences require a different set of methods and considerations. With this workshop contribution, we would like to engage in a discussion on how such a collection of case studies can provide a methodological guidance and critical reflection.

Over the last two years, The Alan Turing Institute and the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) have been working together to discover ways to tackle the difficult issues surrounding explainable AI. The ultimate product of this joint endeavour, Explaining decisions made with AI, published in May 2020, is the most comprehensive practical guidance on AI explanation produced anywhere to date. We have put together this workbook to help support the uptake of that guidance. The goal of the workbook is to summarise some of main themes from Explaining decisions made with AI and then to provide the materials for a workshop exercise that has been built around a use case created to help you gain a flavour of how to put the guidance into practice. In the first three sections, we run through the basics of Explaining decisions made with AI. We provide a precis of the four principles of AI explainability, the typology of AI explanations, and the tasks involved in the explanation-aware design, development, and use of AI/ML systems. We then provide some reflection questions, which are intended to be a launching pad for group discussion, and a starting point for the case-study-based exercise that we have included as Appendix B. In Appendix A, we go into more detailed suggestions about how to organise the workshop. These recommendations are based on two workshops we had the privilege of co-hosting with our colleagues from the ICO and Manchester Metropolitan University in January 2021. The participants of these workshops came from both the private and public sectors, and we are extremely grateful to them for their energy, enthusiasm, and tremendous insight. This workbook would simply not exist without the commitment and keenness of all our collaborators and workshop participants.

A local surrogate for an AI-model correcting a simpler 'base' model is introduced representing an analytical method to yield explanations of AI-predictions. The approach is studied here in the context of the base model being linear regression. The AI-model approximates the residual error of the linear model and the explanations are formulated in terms of the change of the interpretable base model's parameters. Criteria are formulated for the precise relation between lost accuracy of the surrogate, the accuracy of the AI-model, and the surrogate fidelity. It is shown that, assuming a certain maximal amount of noise in the observed data, these criteria induce neighborhoods of the instances to be explained which have an ideal size in terms of maximal accuracy and fidelity.

With recent progress in the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) and increasing use in practice, the need for an evaluation of different XAI methods and their explanation quality in practical usage scenarios arises. For this purpose, we present VitrAI, which is a web-based service with the goal of uniformly demonstrating four different XAI algorithms in the context of three real life scenarios and evaluating their performance and comprehensibility for humans. This work reveals practical obstacles when adopting XAI methods and gives qualitative estimates on how well different approaches perform in said scenarios.