Research Papers

Synthetic Benchmarks for Scientific Research in Explainable Machine Learning

Yang Liu, Sujay Khandagale, Colin White +1

As machine learning models grow more complex and their applications become more high-stakes, tools for explaining model predictions have become increasingly important. This has spurred a flurry of research in model explainability and has given rise to feature attribution methods such as LIME and SHAP. Despite their widespread use, evaluating and comparing different feature attribution methods remains challenging: evaluations ideally require human studies, and empirical evaluation metrics are often data-intensive or computationally prohibitive on real-world datasets. In this work, we address this issue by releasing XAI-Bench: a suite of synthetic datasets along with a library for benchmarking feature attribution algorithms. Unlike real-world datasets, synthetic datasets allow the efficient computation of conditional expected values that are needed to evaluate ground-truth Shapley values and other metrics. The synthetic datasets we release offer a wide variety of parameters that can be configured to simulate real-world data. We demonstrate the power of our library by benchmarking popular explainability techniques across several evaluation metrics and across a variety of settings. The versatility and efficiency of our library will help researchers bring their explainability methods from development to deployment. Our code is available at https://github.com/abacusai/xai-bench.

Neural Network Attribution Methods for Problems in Geoscience: A Novel Synthetic Benchmark Dataset

Antonios Mamalakis, Imme Ebert-Uphoff, Elizabeth A. Barnes

Despite the increasingly successful application of neural networks to many problems in the geosciences, their complex and nonlinear structure makes the interpretation of their predictions difficult, which limits model trust and does not allow scientists to gain physical insights about the problem at hand. Many different methods have been introduced in the emerging field of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), which aim at attributing the network s prediction to specific features in the input domain. XAI methods are usually assessed by using benchmark datasets (like MNIST or ImageNet for image classification). However, an objective, theoretically derived ground truth for the attribution is lacking for most of these datasets, making the assessment of XAI in many cases subjective. Also, benchmark datasets specifically designed for problems in geosciences are rare. Here, we provide a framework, based on the use of additively separable functions, to generate attribution benchmark datasets for regression problems for which the ground truth of the attribution is known a priori. We generate a large benchmark dataset and train a fully connected network to learn the underlying function that was used for simulation. We then compare estimated heatmaps from different XAI methods to the ground truth in order to identify examples where specific XAI methods perform well or poorly. We believe that attribution benchmarks as the ones introduced herein are of great importance for further application of neural networks in the geosciences, and for more objective assessment and accurate implementation of XAI methods, which will increase model trust and assist in discovering new science.

The continuous development of artificial intelligence (AI) theory has propelled this field to unprecedented heights, owing to the relentless efforts of scholars and researchers. In the medical realm, AI takes a pivotal role, leveraging robust machine learning (ML) algorithms. AI technology in medical imaging aids physicians in X-ray, computed tomography (CT) scans, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) diagnoses, conducts pattern recognition and disease prediction based on acoustic data, delivers prognoses on disease types and developmental trends for patients, and employs intelligent health management wearable devices with human-computer interaction technology to name but a few. While these well-established applications have significantly assisted in medical field diagnoses, clinical decision-making, and management, collaboration between the medical and AI sectors faces an urgent challenge: How to substantiate the reliability of decision-making? The underlying issue stems from the conflict between the demand for accountability and result transparency in medical scenarios and the black-box model traits of AI. This article reviews recent research grounded in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), with an emphasis on medical practices within the visual, audio, and multimodal perspectives. We endeavour to categorise and synthesise these practices, aiming to provide support and guidance for future researchers and healthcare professionals.

AI assistants such as ChatGPT are trained to respond to users by saying, "I am a large language model". This raises questions. Do such models know that they are LLMs and reliably act on this knowledge? Are they aware of their current circumstances, such as being deployed to the public? We refer to a model's knowledge of itself and its circumstances as situational awareness. To quantify situational awareness in LLMs, we introduce a range of behavioral tests, based on question answering and instruction following. These tests form the $\textbf{Situational Awareness Dataset (SAD)}$, a benchmark comprising 7 task categories and over 13,000 questions. The benchmark tests numerous abilities, including the capacity of LLMs to (i) recognize their own generated text, (ii) predict their own behavior, (iii) determine whether a prompt is from internal evaluation or real-world deployment, and (iv) follow instructions that depend on self-knowledge. We evaluate 16 LLMs on SAD, including both base (pretrained) and chat models. While all models perform better than chance, even the highest-scoring model (Claude 3 Opus) is far from a human baseline on certain tasks. We also observe that performance on SAD is only partially predicted by metrics of general knowledge (e.g. MMLU). Chat models, which are finetuned to serve as AI assistants, outperform their corresponding base models on SAD but not on general knowledge tasks. The purpose of SAD is to facilitate scientific understanding of situational awareness in LLMs by breaking it down into quantitative abilities. Situational awareness is important because it enhances a model's capacity for autonomous planning and action. While this has potential benefits for automation, it also introduces novel risks related to AI safety and control. Code and latest results available at https://situational-awareness-dataset.org .

The recent O-RAN specifications promote the evolution of RAN architecture by function disaggregation, adoption of open interfaces, and instantiation of a hierarchical closed-loop control architecture managed by RAN Intelligent Controllers (RICs) entities. This paves the road to novel data-driven network management approaches based on programmable logic. Aided by Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML), novel solutions targeting traditionally unsolved RAN management issues can be devised. Nevertheless, the adoption of such smart and autonomous systems is limited by the current inability of human operators to understand the decision process of such AI/ML solutions, affecting their trust in such novel tools. eXplainable AI (XAI) aims at solving this issue, enabling human users to better understand and effectively manage the emerging generation of artificially intelligent schemes, reducing the human-to-machine barrier. In this survey, we provide a summary of the XAI methods and metrics before studying their deployment over the O-RAN Alliance RAN architecture along with its main building blocks. We then present various use cases and discuss the automation of XAI pipelines for O-RAN as well as the underlying security aspects. We also review some projects/standards that tackle this area. Finally, we identify different challenges and research directions that may arise from the heavy adoption of AI/ML decision entities in this context, focusing on how XAI can help to interpret, understand, and improve trust in O-RAN operational networks.

Generating Plausible Counterfactual Explanations for Deep Transformers in Financial Text Classification

Linyi Yang, Eoin M. Kenny, Tin Lok James Ng +3

Corporate mergers and acquisitions (M&A) account for billions of dollars of investment globally every year, and offer an interesting and challenging domain for artificial intelligence. However, in these highly sensitive domains, it is crucial to not only have a highly robust and accurate model, but be able to generate useful explanations to garner a user's trust in the automated system. Regrettably, the recent research regarding eXplainable AI (XAI) in financial text classification has received little to no attention, and many current methods for generating textual-based explanations result in highly implausible explanations, which damage a user's trust in the system. To address these issues, this paper proposes a novel methodology for producing plausible counterfactual explanations, whilst exploring the regularization benefits of adversarial training on language models in the domain of FinTech. Exhaustive quantitative experiments demonstrate that not only does this approach improve the model accuracy when compared to the current state-of-the-art and human performance, but it also generates counterfactual explanations which are significantly more plausible based on human trials.

FR-Train: A Mutual Information-Based Approach to Fair and Robust Training

Yuji Roh, Kangwook Lee, Steven Euijong Whang +1

Trustworthy AI is a critical issue in machine learning where, in addition to training a model that is accurate, one must consider both fair and robust training in the presence of data bias and poisoning. However, the existing model fairness techniques mistakenly view poisoned data as an additional bias to be fixed, resulting in severe performance degradation. To address this problem, we propose FR-Train, which holistically performs fair and robust model training. We provide a mutual information-based interpretation of an existing adversarial training-based fairness-only method, and apply this idea to architect an additional discriminator that can identify poisoned data using a clean validation set and reduce its influence. In our experiments, FR-Train shows almost no decrease in fairness and accuracy in the presence of data poisoning by both mitigating the bias and defending against poisoning. We also demonstrate how to construct clean validation sets using crowdsourcing, and release new benchmark datasets.

Superintelligent Agents Pose Catastrophic Risks: Can Scientist AI Offer a Safer Path?

Yoshua Bengio, Michael Cohen, Damiano Fornasiere +10

The leading AI companies are increasingly focused on building generalist AI agents -- systems that can autonomously plan, act, and pursue goals across almost all tasks that humans can perform. Despite how useful these systems might be, unchecked AI agency poses significant risks to public safety and security, ranging from misuse by malicious actors to a potentially irreversible loss of human control. We discuss how these risks arise from current AI training methods. Indeed, various scenarios and experiments have demonstrated the possibility of AI agents engaging in deception or pursuing goals that were not specified by human operators and that conflict with human interests, such as self-preservation. Following the precautionary principle, we see a strong need for safer, yet still useful, alternatives to the current agency-driven trajectory. Accordingly, we propose as a core building block for further advances the development of a non-agentic AI system that is trustworthy and safe by design, which we call Scientist AI. This system is designed to explain the world from observations, as opposed to taking actions in it to imitate or please humans. It comprises a world model that generates theories to explain data and a question-answering inference machine. Both components operate with an explicit notion of uncertainty to mitigate the risks of overconfident predictions. In light of these considerations, a Scientist AI could be used to assist human researchers in accelerating scientific progress, including in AI safety. In particular, our system can be employed as a guardrail against AI agents that might be created despite the risks involved. Ultimately, focusing on non-agentic AI may enable the benefits of AI innovation while avoiding the risks associated with the current trajectory. We hope these arguments will motivate researchers, developers, and policymakers to favor this safer path.

Advances in machine learning have led to graph neural network-based methods for drug discovery, yielding promising results in molecular design, chemical synthesis planning, and molecular property prediction. However, current graph neural networks (GNNs) remain of limited acceptance in drug discovery is limited due to their lack of interpretability. Although this major weakness has been mitigated by the development of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques, the "ground truth" assignment in most explainable tasks ultimately rests with subjective judgments by humans so that the quality of model interpretation is hard to evaluate in quantity. In this work, we first build three levels of benchmark datasets to quantitatively assess the interpretability of the state-of-the-art GNN models. Then we implemented recent XAI methods in combination with different GNN algorithms to highlight the benefits, limitations, and future opportunities for drug discovery. As a result, GradInput and IG generally provide the best model interpretability for GNNs, especially when combined with GraphNet and CMPNN. The integrated and developed XAI package is fully open-sourced and can be used by practitioners to train new models on other drug discovery tasks.

As AI systems are integrated into high stakes social domains, researchers now examine how to design and operate them in a safe and ethical manner. However, the criteria for identifying and diagnosing safety risks in complex social contexts remain unclear and contested. In this paper, we examine the vagueness in debates about the safety and ethical behavior of AI systems. We show how this vagueness cannot be resolved through mathematical formalism alone, instead requiring deliberation about the politics of development as well as the context of deployment. Drawing from a new sociotechnical lexicon, we redefine vagueness in terms of distinct design challenges at key stages in AI system development. The resulting framework of Hard Choices in Artificial Intelligence (HCAI) empowers developers by 1) identifying points of overlap between design decisions and major sociotechnical challenges; 2) motivating the creation of stakeholder feedback channels so that safety issues can be exhaustively addressed. As such, HCAI contributes to a timely debate about the status of AI development in democratic societies, arguing that deliberation should be the goal of AI Safety, not just the procedure by which it is ensured.

Explaining and Interpreting LSTMs

Leila Arras, Jose A. Arjona-Medina, Michael Widrich +5

While neural networks have acted as a strong unifying force in the design of modern AI systems, the neural network architectures themselves remain highly heterogeneous due to the variety of tasks to be solved. In this chapter, we explore how to adapt the Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP) technique used for explaining the predictions of feed-forward networks to the LSTM architecture used for sequential data modeling and forecasting. The special accumulators and gated interactions present in the LSTM require both a new propagation scheme and an extension of the underlying theoretical framework to deliver faithful explanations.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) recently launched the Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) program that aims to create a suite of new AI techniques that enable end users to understand, appropriately trust, and effectively manage the emerging generation of AI systems. In this paper, inspired by DARPA's XAI program, we propose a new paradigm in security research: Explainable Security (XSec). We discuss the ``Six Ws'' of XSec (Who? What? Where? When? Why? and How?) and argue that XSec has unique and complex characteristics: XSec involves several different stakeholders (i.e., the system's developers, analysts, users and attackers) and is multi-faceted by nature (as it requires reasoning about system model, threat model and properties of security, privacy and trust as well as about concrete attacks, vulnerabilities and countermeasures). We define a roadmap for XSec that identifies several possible research directions.