Research Papers

Explainable AI And Visual Reasoning: Insights From Radiology

Robert Kaufman, David Kirsh

Why do explainable AI (XAI) explanations in radiology, despite their promise of transparency, still fail to gain human trust? Current XAI approaches provide justification for predictions, however, these do not meet practitioners' needs. These XAI explanations lack intuitive coverage of the evidentiary basis for a given classification, posing a significant barrier to adoption. We posit that XAI explanations that mirror human processes of reasoning and justification with evidence may be more useful and trustworthy than traditional visual explanations like heat maps. Using a radiology case study, we demonstrate how radiology practitioners get other practitioners to see a diagnostic conclusion's validity. Machine-learned classifications lack this evidentiary grounding and consequently fail to elicit trust and adoption by potential users. Insights from this study may generalize to guiding principles for human-centered explanation design based on human reasoning and justification of evidence.

Heatmaps are widely used to interpret deep neural networks, particularly for computer vision tasks, and the heatmap-based explainable AI (XAI) techniques are a well-researched topic. However, most studies concentrate on enhancing the quality of the generated heatmap or discovering alternate heatmap generation techniques, and little effort has been devoted to making heatmap-based XAI automatic, interactive, scalable, and accessible. To address this gap, we propose a framework that includes two modules: (1) context modelling and (2) reasoning. We proposed a template-based image captioning approach for context modelling to create text-based contextual information from the heatmap and input data. The reasoning module leverages a large language model to provide explanations in combination with specialised knowledge. Our qualitative experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework and heatmap captioning approach. The code for the proposed template-based heatmap captioning approach will be publicly available.

Existing methods for explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), including popular feature importance measures such as SAGE, are mostly restricted to the batch learning scenario. However, machine learning is often applied in dynamic environments, where data arrives continuously and learning must be done in an online manner. Therefore, we propose iSAGE, a time- and memory-efficient incrementalization of SAGE, which is able to react to changes in the model as well as to drift in the data-generating process. We further provide efficient feature removal methods that break (interventional) and retain (observational) feature dependencies. Moreover, we formally analyze our explanation method to show that iSAGE adheres to similar theoretical properties as SAGE. Finally, we evaluate our approach in a thorough experimental analysis based on well-established data sets and data streams with concept drift.

Diversity matters: Robustness of bias measurements in Wikidata

Paramita Das, Sai Keerthana Karnam, Anirban Panda +3

With the widespread use of knowledge graphs (KG) in various automated AI systems and applications, it is very important to ensure that information retrieval algorithms leveraging them are free from societal biases. Previous works have depicted biases that persist in KGs, as well as employed several metrics for measuring the biases. However, such studies lack the systematic exploration of the sensitivity of the bias measurements, through varying sources of data, or the embedding algorithms used. To address this research gap, in this work, we present a holistic analysis of bias measurement on the knowledge graph. First, we attempt to reveal data biases that surface in Wikidata for thirteen different demographics selected from seven continents. Next, we attempt to unfold the variance in the detection of biases by two different knowledge graph embedding algorithms - TransE and ComplEx. We conduct our extensive experiments on a large number of occupations sampled from the thirteen demographics with respect to the sensitive attribute, i.e., gender. Our results show that the inherent data bias that persists in KG can be altered by specific algorithm bias as incorporated by KG embedding learning algorithms. Further, we show that the choice of the state-of-the-art KG embedding algorithm has a strong impact on the ranking of biased occupations irrespective of gender. We observe that the similarity of the biased occupations across demographics is minimal which reflects the socio-cultural differences around the globe. We believe that this full-scale audit of the bias measurement pipeline will raise awareness among the community while deriving insights related to design choices of data and algorithms both and refrain from the popular dogma of ``one-size-fits-all''.

Users' physical safety is an increasing concern as the market for intelligent systems continues to grow, where unconstrained systems may recommend users dangerous actions that can lead to serious injury. Covertly unsafe text is an area of particular interest, as such text may arise from everyday scenarios and are challenging to detect as harmful. We propose FARM, a novel framework leveraging external knowledge for trustworthy rationale generation in the context of safety. In particular, FARM foveates on missing knowledge to qualify the information required to reason in specific scenarios and retrieves this information with attribution to trustworthy sources. This knowledge is used to both classify the safety of the original text and generate human-interpretable rationales, shedding light on the risk of systems to specific user groups and helping both stakeholders manage the risks of their systems and policymakers to provide concrete safeguards for consumer safety. Our experiments show that FARM obtains state-of-the-art results on the SafeText dataset, showing absolute improvement in safety classification accuracy by 5.9%.

Clustering is a fundamental problem in many areas, which aims to partition a given data set into groups based on some distance measure, such that the data points in the same group are similar while that in different groups are dissimilar. Due to its importance and NP-hardness, a lot of methods have been proposed, among which evolutionary algorithms are a class of popular ones. Evolutionary clustering has found many successful applications, but all the results are empirical, lacking theoretical support. This paper fills this gap by proving that the approximation performance of the GSEMO (a simple multi-objective evolutionary algorithm) for solving four formulations of clustering, i.e., $k$-tMM, $k$-center, discrete $k$-median and $k$-means, can be theoretically guaranteed. Furthermore, we consider clustering under fairness, which tries to avoid algorithmic bias, and has recently been an important research topic in machine learning. We prove that for discrete $k$-median clustering under individual fairness, the approximation performance of the GSEMO can be theoretically guaranteed with respect to both the objective function and the fairness constraint.

Crown-CAM: Interpretable Visual Explanations for Tree Crown Detection in Aerial Images

Seyed Mojtaba Marvasti-Zadeh, Devin Goodsman, Nilanjan Ray +1

Visual explanation of ``black-box'' models allows researchers in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to interpret the model's decisions in a human-understandable manner. In this paper, we propose interpretable class activation mapping for tree crown detection (Crown-CAM) that overcomes inaccurate localization & computational complexity of previous methods while generating reliable visual explanations for the challenging and dynamic problem of tree crown detection in aerial images. It consists of an unsupervised selection of activation maps, computation of local score maps, and non-contextual background suppression to efficiently provide fine-grain localization of tree crowns in scenarios with dense forest trees or scenes without tree crowns. Additionally, two Intersection over Union (IoU)-based metrics are introduced to effectively quantify both the accuracy and inaccuracy of generated explanations with respect to regions with or even without tree crowns in the image. Empirical evaluations demonstrate that the proposed Crown-CAM outperforms the Score-CAM, Augmented Score-CAM, and Eigen-CAM methods by an average IoU margin of 8.7, 5.3, and 21.7 (and 3.3, 9.8, and 16.5) respectively in improving the accuracy (and decreasing inaccuracy) of visual explanations on the challenging NEON tree crown dataset.

Developing robust and fair AI systems require datasets with comprehensive set of labels that can help ensure the validity and legitimacy of relevant measurements. Recent efforts, therefore, focus on collecting person-related datasets that have carefully selected labels, including sensitive characteristics, and consent forms in place to use those attributes for model testing and development. Responsible data collection involves several stages, including but not limited to determining use-case scenarios, selecting categories (annotations) such that the data are fit for the purpose of measuring algorithmic bias for subgroups and most importantly ensure that the selected categories/subcategories are robust to regional diversities and inclusive of as many subgroups as possible. Meta, in a continuation of our efforts to measure AI algorithmic bias and robustness (https://ai.facebook.com/blog/shedding-light-on-fairness-in-ai-with-a-new-data-set), is working on collecting a large consent-driven dataset with a comprehensive list of categories. This paper describes our proposed design of such categories and subcategories for Casual Conversations v2.

In recent years, XAI researchers have been formalizing proposals and developing new methods to explain black box models, with no general consensus in the community on which method to use to explain these models, with this choice being almost directly linked to the popularity of a specific method. Methods such as Ciu, Dalex, Eli5, Lofo, Shap and Skater emerged with the proposal to explain black box models through global rankings of feature relevance, which based on different methodologies, generate global explanations that indicate how the model's inputs explain its predictions. In this context, 41 datasets, 4 tree-ensemble algorithms (Light Gradient Boosting, CatBoost, Random Forest, and Gradient Boosting), and 6 XAI methods were used to support the launch of a new XAI method, called eXirt, based on Item Response Theory - IRT and aimed at tree-ensemble black box models that use tabular data referring to binary classification problems. In the first set of analyses, the 164 global feature relevance ranks of the eXirt were compared with 984 ranks of the other XAI methods present in the literature, seeking to highlight their similarities and differences. In a second analysis, exclusive explanations of the eXirt based on Explanation-by-example were presented that help in understanding the model trust. Thus, it was verified that eXirt is able to generate global explanations of tree-ensemble models and also local explanations of instances of models through IRT, showing how this consolidated theory can be used in machine learning in order to obtain explainable and reliable models.

A survey of Identification and mitigation of Machine Learning algorithmic biases in Image Analysis

Laurent Risser, Agustin Picard, Lucas Hervier +1

The problem of algorithmic bias in machine learning has gained a lot of attention in recent years due to its concrete and potentially hazardous implications in society. In much the same manner, biases can also alter modern industrial and safety-critical applications where machine learning are based on high dimensional inputs such as images. This issue has however been mostly left out of the spotlight in the machine learning literature. Contrarily to societal applications where a set of proxy variables can be provided by the common sense or by regulations to draw the attention on potential risks, industrial and safety-critical applications are most of the times sailing blind. The variables related to undesired biases can indeed be indirectly represented in the input data, or can be unknown, thus making them harder to tackle. This raises serious and well-founded concerns towards the commercial deployment of AI-based solutions, especially in a context where new regulations clearly address the issues opened by undesired biases in AI. Consequently, we propose here to make an overview of recent advances in this area, firstly by presenting how such biases can demonstrate themselves, then by exploring different ways to bring them to light, and by probing different possibilities to mitigate them. We finally present a practical remote sensing use-case of industrial Fairness.

Autoregressive language models, which use deep learning to produce human-like texts, have become increasingly widespread. Such models are powering popular virtual assistants in areas like smart health, finance, and autonomous driving. While the parameters of these large language models are improving, concerns persist that these models might not work equally for all subgroups in society. Despite growing discussions of AI fairness across disciplines, there lacks systemic metrics to assess what equity means in dialogue systems and how to engage different populations in the assessment loop. Grounded in theories of deliberative democracy and science and technology studies, this paper proposes an analytical framework for unpacking the meaning of equity in human-AI dialogues. Using this framework, we conducted an auditing study to examine how GPT-3 responded to different sub-populations on crucial science and social topics: climate change and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Our corpus consists of over 20,000 rounds of dialogues between GPT-3 and 3290 individuals who vary in gender, race and ethnicity, education level, English as a first language, and opinions toward the issues. We found a substantively worse user experience with GPT-3 among the opinion and the education minority subpopulations; however, these two groups achieved the largest knowledge gain, changing attitudes toward supporting BLM and climate change efforts after the chat. We traced these user experience divides to conversational differences and found that GPT-3 used more negative expressions when it responded to the education and opinion minority groups, compared to its responses to the majority groups. We discuss the implications of our findings for a deliberative conversational AI system that centralizes diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Explainable AI (XAI) is an important developing area but remains relatively understudied for clustering. We propose an explainable-by-design clustering approach that not only finds clusters but also exemplars to explain each cluster. The use of exemplars for understanding is supported by the exemplar-based school of concept definition in psychology. We show that finding a small set of exemplars to explain even a single cluster is computationally intractable; hence, the overall problem is challenging. We develop an approximation algorithm that provides provable performance guarantees with respect to clustering quality as well as the number of exemplars used. This basic algorithm explains all the instances in every cluster whilst another approximation algorithm uses a bounded number of exemplars to allow simpler explanations and provably covers a large fraction of all the instances. Experimental results show that our work is useful in domains involving difficult to understand deep embeddings of images and text.