Research Papers

The Dark Side of Explanations: Poisoning Recommender Systems with Counterfactual Examples

Ziheng Chen, Fabrizio Silvestri, Jia Wang +2

Deep learning-based recommender systems have become an integral part of several online platforms. However, their black-box nature emphasizes the need for explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) approaches to provide human-understandable reasons why a specific item gets recommended to a given user. One such method is counterfactual explanation (CF). While CFs can be highly beneficial for users and system designers, malicious actors may also exploit these explanations to undermine the system's security. In this work, we propose H-CARS, a novel strategy to poison recommender systems via CFs. Specifically, we first train a logical-reasoning-based surrogate model on training data derived from counterfactual explanations. By reversing the learning process of the recommendation model, we thus develop a proficient greedy algorithm to generate fabricated user profiles and their associated interaction records for the aforementioned surrogate model. Our experiments, which employ a well-known CF generation method and are conducted on two distinct datasets, show that H-CARS yields significant and successful attack performance.

Deep learning (DL) has emerged as a promising tool to downscale climate projections at regional-to-local scales from large-scale atmospheric fields following the perfect-prognosis (PP) approach. Given their complexity, it is crucial to properly evaluate these methods, especially when applied to changing climatic conditions where the ability to extrapolate/generalise is key. In this work, we intercompare several DL models extracted from the literature for the same challenging use-case (downscaling temperature in the CORDEX North America domain) and expand standard evaluation methods building on eXplainable artifical intelligence (XAI) techniques. We show how these techniques can be used to unravel the internal behaviour of these models, providing new evaluation dimensions and aiding in their diagnostic and design. These results show the usefulness of incorporating XAI techniques into statistical downscaling evaluation frameworks, especially when working with large regions and/or under climate change conditions.

Equalizing Credit Opportunity in Algorithms: Aligning Algorithmic Fairness Research with U.S. Fair Lending Regulation

I. Elizabeth Kumar, Keegan E. Hines, John P. Dickerson

Credit is an essential component of financial wellbeing in America, and unequal access to it is a large factor in the economic disparities between demographic groups that exist today. Today, machine learning algorithms, sometimes trained on alternative data, are increasingly being used to determine access to credit, yet research has shown that machine learning can encode many different versions of "unfairness," thus raising the concern that banks and other financial institutions could -- potentially unwittingly -- engage in illegal discrimination through the use of this technology. In the US, there are laws in place to make sure discrimination does not happen in lending and agencies charged with enforcing them. However, conversations around fair credit models in computer science and in policy are often misaligned: fair machine learning research often lacks legal and practical considerations specific to existing fair lending policy, and regulators have yet to issue new guidance on how, if at all, credit risk models should be utilizing practices and techniques from the research community. This paper aims to better align these sides of the conversation. We describe the current state of credit discrimination regulation in the United States, contextualize results from fair ML research to identify the specific fairness concerns raised by the use of machine learning in lending, and discuss regulatory opportunities to address these concerns.

ASTERYX : A model-Agnostic SaT-basEd appRoach for sYmbolic and score-based eXplanations

Ryma Boumazouza, Fahima Cheikh-Alili, Bertrand Mazure +1

The ever increasing complexity of machine learning techniques used more and more in practice, gives rise to the need to explain the predictions and decisions of these models, often used as black-boxes. Explainable AI approaches are either numerical feature-based aiming to quantify the contribution of each feature in a prediction or symbolic providing certain forms of symbolic explanations such as counterfactuals. This paper proposes a generic agnostic approach named ASTERYX allowing to generate both symbolic explanations and score-based ones. Our approach is declarative and it is based on the encoding of the model to be explained in an equivalent symbolic representation, this latter serves to generate in particular two types of symbolic explanations which are sufficient reasons and counterfactuals. We then associate scores reflecting the relevance of the explanations and the features w.r.t to some properties. Our experimental results show the feasibility of the proposed approach and its effectiveness in providing symbolic and score-based explanations.

Eliminating The Impossible, Whatever Remains Must Be True

Jinqiang Yu, Alexey Ignatiev, Peter J. Stuckey +2

The rise of AI methods to make predictions and decisions has led to a pressing need for more explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods. One common approach for XAI is to produce a post-hoc explanation, explaining why a black box ML model made a certain prediction. Formal approaches to post-hoc explanations provide succinct reasons for why a prediction was made, as well as why not another prediction was made. But these approaches assume that features are independent and uniformly distributed. While this means that "why" explanations are correct, they may be longer than required. It also means the "why not" explanations may be suspect as the counterexamples they rely on may not be meaningful. In this paper, we show how one can apply background knowledge to give more succinct "why" formal explanations, that are presumably easier to interpret by humans, and give more accurate "why not" explanations. In addition, we show how to use existing rule induction techniques to efficiently extract background information from a dataset, and also how to report which background information was used to make an explanation, allowing a human to examine it if they doubt the correctness of the explanation.

Automatically recommending relevant law articles to a given legal case has attracted much attention as it can greatly release human labor from searching over the large database of laws. However, current researches only support coarse-grained recommendation where all relevant articles are predicted as a whole without explaining which specific fact each article is relevant with. Since one case can be formed of many supporting facts, traversing over them to verify the correctness of recommendation results can be time-consuming. We believe that learning fine-grained correspondence between each single fact and law articles is crucial for an accurate and trustworthy AI system. With this motivation, we perform a pioneering study and create a corpus with manually annotated fact-article correspondences. We treat the learning as a text matching task and propose a multi-level matching network to address it. To help the model better digest the content of law articles, we parse articles in form of premise-conclusion pairs with random forest. Experiments show that the parsed form yielded better performance and the resulting model surpassed other popular text matching baselines. Furthermore, we compare with previous researches and find that establishing the fine-grained fact-article correspondences can improve the recommendation accuracy by a large margin. Our best system reaches an F1 score of 96.3%, making it of great potential for practical use. It can also significantly boost the downstream task of legal decision prediction, increasing the F1 score by up to 12.7%.

As an emerging field in Machine Learning, Explainable AI (XAI) has been offering remarkable performance in interpreting the decisions made by Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). To achieve visual explanations for CNNs, methods based on class activation mapping and randomized input sampling have gained great popularity. However, the attribution methods based on these techniques provide lower resolution and blurry explanation maps that limit their explanation power. To circumvent this issue, visualization based on various layers is sought. In this work, we collect visualization maps from multiple layers of the model based on an attribution-based input sampling technique and aggregate them to reach a fine-grained and complete explanation. We also propose a layer selection strategy that applies to the whole family of CNN-based models, based on which our extraction framework is applied to visualize the last layers of each convolutional block of the model. Moreover, we perform an empirical analysis of the efficacy of derived lower-level information to enhance the represented attributions. Comprehensive experiments conducted on shallow and deep models trained on natural and industrial datasets, using both ground-truth and model-truth based evaluation metrics validate our proposed algorithm by meeting or outperforming the state-of-the-art methods in terms of explanation ability and visual quality, demonstrating that our method shows stability regardless of the size of objects or instances to be explained.

IMLI: An Incremental Framework for MaxSAT-Based Learning of Interpretable Classification Rules

Bishwamittra Ghosh, Kuldeep S. Meel

The wide adoption of machine learning in the critical domains such as medical diagnosis, law, education had propelled the need for interpretable techniques due to the need for end users to understand the reasoning behind decisions due to learning systems. The computational intractability of interpretable learning led practitioners to design heuristic techniques, which fail to provide sound handles to tradeoff accuracy and interpretability. Motivated by the success of MaxSAT solvers over the past decade, recently MaxSAT-based approach, called MLIC, was proposed that seeks to reduce the problem of learning interpretable rules expressed in Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF) to a MaxSAT query. While MLIC was shown to achieve accuracy similar to that of other state of the art black-box classifiers while generating small interpretable CNF formulas, the runtime performance of MLIC is significantly lagging and renders approach unusable in practice. In this context, authors raised the question: Is it possible to achieve the best of both worlds, i.e., a sound framework for interpretable learning that can take advantage of MaxSAT solvers while scaling to real-world instances? In this paper, we take a step towards answering the above question in affirmation. We propose IMLI: an incremental approach to MaxSAT based framework that achieves scalable runtime performance via partition-based training methodology. Extensive experiments on benchmarks arising from UCI repository demonstrate that IMLI achieves up to three orders of magnitude runtime improvement without loss of accuracy and interpretability.

Toward the Engineering of Virtuous Machines

Naveen Sundar Govindarajulu, Selmer Bringsjord, Rikhiya Ghosh

While various traditions under the 'virtue ethics' umbrella have been studied extensively and advocated by ethicists, it has not been clear that there exists a version of virtue ethics rigorous enough to be a target for machine ethics (which we take to include the engineering of an ethical sensibility in a machine or robot itself, not only the study of ethics in the humans who might create artificial agents). We begin to address this by presenting an embryonic formalization of a key part of any virtue-ethics theory: namely, the learning of virtue by a focus on exemplars of moral virtue. Our work is based in part on a computational formal logic previously used to formally model other ethical theories and principles therein, and to implement these models in artificial agents.

Explainable AI (XAI) is a rapidly growing domain with a myriad of proposed methods as well as metrics aiming to evaluate their efficacy. However, current studies are often of limited scope, examining only a handful of XAI methods and ignoring underlying design parameters for performance, such as the model architecture or the nature of input data. Moreover, they often rely on one or a few metrics and neglect thorough validation, increasing the risk of selection bias and ignoring discrepancies among metrics. These shortcomings leave practitioners confused about which method to choose for their problem. In response, we introduce LATEC, a large-scale benchmark that critically evaluates 17 prominent XAI methods using 20 distinct metrics. We systematically incorporate vital design parameters like varied architectures and diverse input modalities, resulting in 7,560 examined combinations. Through LATEC, we showcase the high risk of conflicting metrics leading to unreliable rankings and consequently propose a more robust evaluation scheme. Further, we comprehensively evaluate various XAI methods to assist practitioners in selecting appropriate methods aligning with their needs. Curiously, the emerging top-performing method, Expected Gradients, is not examined in any relevant related study. LATEC reinforces its role in future XAI research by publicly releasing all 326k saliency maps and 378k metric scores as a (meta-)evaluation dataset. The benchmark is hosted at: https://github.com/IML-DKFZ/latec.

The Deep learning (DL) models for diagnosing breast cancer from mammographic images often operate as "black boxes", making it difficult for healthcare professionals to trust and understand their decision-making processes. The study presents an integrated framework combining Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) for the enhanced diagnosis of breast cancer using the CBIS-DDSM dataset. The methodology encompasses an elaborate data preprocessing pipeline and advanced data augmentation techniques to counteract dataset limitations and transfer learning using pre-trained networks such as VGG-16, Inception-V3 and ResNet was employed. A focal point of our study is the evaluation of XAI's effectiveness in interpreting model predictions, highlighted by utilizing the Hausdorff measure to assess the alignment between AI-generated explanations and expert annotations quantitatively. This approach is critical for XAI in promoting trustworthiness and ethical fairness in AI-assisted diagnostics. The findings from our research illustrate the effective collaboration between CNNs and XAI in advancing diagnostic methods for breast cancer, thereby facilitating a more seamless integration of advanced AI technologies within clinical settings. By enhancing the interpretability of AI driven decisions, this work lays the groundwork for improved collaboration between AI systems and medical practitioners, ultimately enriching patient care. Furthermore, the implications of our research extended well beyond the current methodologies. It encourages further research into how to combine multimodal data and improve AI explanations to meet the needs of clinical practice.

As artificial intelligence transforms a wide range of sectors and drives innovation, it also introduces complex challenges concerning ethics, transparency, bias, and fairness. The imperative for integrating Responsible AI (RAI) principles within governance frameworks is paramount to mitigate these emerging risks. While there are many solutions for AI governance, significant questions remain about their effectiveness in practice. Addressing this knowledge gap, this paper aims to examine the existing literature on AI Governance. The focus of this study is to analyse the literature to answer key questions: WHO is accountable for AI systems' governance, WHAT elements are being governed, WHEN governance occurs within the AI development life cycle, and HOW it is executed through various mechanisms like frameworks, tools, standards, policies, or models. Employing a systematic literature review methodology, a rigorous search and selection process has been employed. This effort resulted in the identification of 61 relevant articles on the subject of AI Governance. Out of the 61 studies analysed, only 5 provided complete responses to all questions. The findings from this review aid research in formulating more holistic and comprehensive Responsible AI (RAI) governance frameworks. This study highlights important role of AI governance on various levels specially organisational in establishing effective and responsible AI practices. The findings of this study provides a foundational basis for future research and development of comprehensive governance models that align with RAI principles.