Research Papers

Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are nowadays the model of choice in Computer Vision, thanks to their ability to automatize the feature extraction process in visual tasks. However, the knowledge acquired during training is fully subsymbolic, and hence difficult to understand and explain to end users. In this paper, we propose a new technique called HOLMES (HOLonym-MEronym based Semantic inspection) that decomposes a label into a set of related concepts, and provides component-level explanations for an image classification model. Specifically, HOLMES leverages ontologies, web scraping and transfer learning to automatically construct meronym (parts)-based detectors for a given holonym (class). Then, it produces heatmaps at the meronym level and finally, by probing the holonym CNN with occluded images, it highlights the importance of each part on the classification output. Compared to state-of-the-art saliency methods, HOLMES takes a step further and provides information about both where and what the holonym CNN is looking at, without relying on densely annotated datasets and without forcing concepts to be associated to single computational units. Extensive experimental evaluation on different categories of objects (animals, tools and vehicles) shows the feasibility of our approach. On average, HOLMES explanations include at least two meronyms, and the ablation of a single meronym roughly halves the holonym model confidence. The resulting heatmaps were quantitatively evaluated using the deletion/insertion/preservation curves. All metrics were comparable to those achieved by GradCAM, while offering the advantage of further decomposing the heatmap in human-understandable concepts, thus highlighting both the relevance of meronyms to object classification, as well as HOLMES ability to capture it. The code is available at https://github.com/FrancesC0de/HOLMES.

Trustworthy AI is crucial to the widespread adoption of AI in high-stakes applications with fairness, robustness, and accuracy being some of the key trustworthiness metrics. In this work, we propose a controllable framework for data-centric trustworthy AI (DCTAI)- VTruST, that allows users to control the trade-offs between the different trustworthiness metrics of the constructed training datasets. A key challenge in implementing an efficient DCTAI framework is to design an online value-function-based training data subset selection algorithm. We pose the training data valuation and subset selection problem as an online sparse approximation formulation. We propose a novel online version of the Orthogonal Matching Pursuit (OMP) algorithm for solving this problem. Experimental results show that VTruST outperforms the state-of-the-art baselines on social, image, and scientific datasets. We also show that the data values generated by VTruST can provide effective data-centric explanations for different trustworthiness metrics.

The notion of robustness in XAI refers to the observed variations in the explanation of the prediction of a learned model with respect to changes in the input leading to that prediction. Intuitively, if the input being explained is modified slightly subtly enough so as to not change the prediction of the model too much, then we would expect that the explanation provided for that new input does not change much either. We argue that a combination through discriminative averaging of ensembles weak learners explanations can improve the robustness of explanations in ensemble methods.This approach has been implemented and tested with post-hoc SHAP method and Random Forest ensemble with successful results. The improvements obtained have been measured quantitatively and some insights into the explicability robustness in ensemble methods are presented.

In recent years, black-box machine learning approaches have become a dominant modeling paradigm for knowledge extraction in remote sensing. Despite the potential benefits of uncovering the inner workings of these models with explainable AI, a comprehensive overview summarizing the explainable AI methods used and their objectives, findings, and challenges in remote sensing applications is still missing. In this paper, we address this gap by performing a systematic review to identify the key trends in the field and shed light on novel explainable AI approaches and emerging directions that tackle specific remote sensing challenges. We also reveal the common patterns of explanation interpretation, discuss the extracted scientific insights, and reflect on the approaches used for the evaluation of explainable AI methods. As such, our review provides a complete summary of the state-of-the-art of explainable AI in remote sensing. Further, we give a detailed outlook on the challenges and promising research directions, representing a basis for novel methodological development and a useful starting point for new researchers in the field.

Learning Discretized Bayesian Networks with GOMEA

Damy M. F. Ha, Tanja Alderliesten, Peter A. N. Bosman

Bayesian networks model relationships between random variables under uncertainty and can be used to predict the likelihood of events and outcomes while incorporating observed evidence. From an eXplainable AI (XAI) perspective, such models are interesting as they tend to be compact. Moreover, captured relations can be directly inspected by domain experts. In practice, data is often real-valued. Unless assumptions of normality can be made, discretization is often required. The optimal discretization, however, depends on the relations modelled between the variables. This complicates learning Bayesian networks from data. For this reason, most literature focuses on learning conditional dependencies between sets of variables, called structure learning. In this work, we extend an existing state-of-the-art structure learning approach based on the Gene-pool Optimal Mixing Evolutionary Algorithm (GOMEA) to jointly learn variable discretizations. The proposed Discretized Bayesian Network GOMEA (DBN-GOMEA) obtains similar or better results than the current state-of-the-art when tasked to retrieve randomly generated ground-truth networks. Moreover, leveraging a key strength of evolutionary algorithms, we can straightforwardly perform DBN learning multi-objectively. We show how this enables incorporating expert knowledge in a uniquely insightful fashion, finding multiple DBNs that trade-off complexity, accuracy, and the difference with a pre-determined expert network.

In 2019, the paper entitled "Model Cards for Model Reporting" introduced a new tool for documenting model performance and encouraged the practice of transparent reporting for a defined list of categories. One of the categories detailed in that paper is ethical considerations, which includes the subcategories of data, human life, mitigations, risks and harms, and use cases. We propose to reclassify this category in the original model card due to the recent maturing of the field known as trustworthy AI, a term which analyzes whether the algorithmic properties of the model indicate that the AI system is deserving of trust from its stakeholders. In our examination of trustworthy AI, we highlight three respected organizations - the European Commission's High-Level Expert Group on AI, the OECD, and the U.S.-based NIST - that have written guidelines on various aspects of trustworthy AI. These recent publications converge on numerous characteristics of the term, including accountability, explainability, fairness, privacy, reliability, robustness, safety, security, and transparency, while recognizing that the implementation of trustworthy AI varies by context. Our reclassification of the original model-card category known as ethical considerations involves a two-step process: 1) adding a new category known as trustworthiness, where the subcategories will be derived from the discussion of trustworthy AI in our paper, and 2) maintaining the subcategories of ethical considerations under a renamed category known as risk environment and risk management, a title which we believe better captures today's understanding of the essence of these topics. We hope that this reclassification will further the goals of the original paper and continue to prompt those releasing trained models to accompany these models with documentation that will assist in the evaluation of their algorithmic properties.

Interpretable classifiers for tabular data via discretization and feature selection

Reijo Jaakkola, Tomi Janhunen, Antti Kuusisto +2

We introduce a method for computing immediately human interpretable yet accurate classifiers from tabular data. The classifiers obtained are short Boolean formulas, computed via first discretizing the original data and then using feature selection coupled with a very fast algorithm for producing the best possible Boolean classifier for the setting. We demonstrate the approach via 12 experiments, obtaining results with accuracies comparable to ones obtained via random forests, XGBoost, and existing results for the same datasets in the literature. In most cases, the accuracy of our method is in fact similar to that of the reference methods, even though the main objective of our study is the immediate interpretability of our classifiers. We also prove a new result on the probability that the classifier we obtain from real-life data corresponds to the ideally best classifier with respect to the background distribution the data comes from.

This position paper presents a theoretical framework for enhancing explainable artificial intelligence (xAI) through emergent communication (EmCom), focusing on creating a causal understanding of AI model outputs. We explore the novel integration of EmCom into AI systems, offering a paradigm shift from conventional associative relationships between inputs and outputs to a more nuanced, causal interpretation. The framework aims to revolutionize how AI processes are understood, making them more transparent and interpretable. While the initial application of this model is demonstrated on synthetic data, the implications of this research extend beyond these simple applications. This general approach has the potential to redefine interactions with AI across multiple domains, fostering trust and informed decision-making in healthcare and in various sectors where AI's decision-making processes are critical. The paper discusses the theoretical underpinnings of this approach, its potential broad applications, and its alignment with the growing need for responsible and transparent AI systems in an increasingly digital world.

In the European context, both the EU AI Act proposal and the draft Standardisation Request on safe and trustworthy AI link standardisation to fundamental rights. However, these texts do not provide any guidelines that specify and detail the relationship between AI standards and fundamental rights, its meaning or implication. This chapter aims to clarify this critical regulatory blind spot. The main issue tackled is whether the adoption of AI harmonised standards, based on the future AI Act, should take into account fundamental rights. In our view, the response is yes. The high risks posed by certain AI systems relate in particular to infringements of fundamental rights. Therefore, mitigating such risks involves fundamental rights considerations and this is what future harmonised standards should reflect. At the same time, valid criticisms of the European standardisation process have to be addressed. Finally, the practical incorporation of fundamental rights considerations in the ongoing European standardisation of AI systems is discussed.

While the operationalisation of high-level AI ethics principles into practical AI/ML systems has made progress, there is still a theory-practice gap in managing tensions between the underlying AI ethics aspects. We cover five approaches for addressing the tensions via trade-offs, ranging from rudimentary to complex. The approaches differ in the types of considered context, scope, methods for measuring contexts, and degree of justification. None of the approaches is likely to be appropriate for all organisations, systems, or applications. To address this, we propose a framework which consists of: (i) proactive identification of tensions, (ii) prioritisation and weighting of ethics aspects, (iii) justification and documentation of trade-off decisions. The proposed framework aims to facilitate the implementation of well-rounded AI/ML systems that are appropriate for potential regulatory requirements.

Predicting in-hospital mortality for intensive care unit (ICU) patients is key to final clinical outcomes. AI has shown advantaged accuracy but suffers from the lack of explainability. To address this issue, this paper proposes an eXplainable Multimodal Mortality Predictor (X-MMP) approaching an efficient, explainable AI solution for predicting in-hospital mortality via multimodal ICU data. We employ multimodal learning in our framework, which can receive heterogeneous inputs from clinical data and make decisions. Furthermore, we introduce an explainable method, namely Layer-Wise Propagation to Transformer, as a proper extension of the LRP method to Transformers, producing explanations over multimodal inputs and revealing the salient features attributed to prediction. Moreover, the contribution of each modality to clinical outcomes can be visualized, assisting clinicians in understanding the reasoning behind decision-making. We construct a multimodal dataset based on MIMIC-III and MIMIC-III Waveform Database Matched Subset. Comprehensive experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate that our proposed framework can achieve reasonable interpretation with competitive prediction accuracy. In particular, our framework can be easily transferred to other clinical tasks, which facilitates the discovery of crucial factors in healthcare research.

Recent developments in AI have brought broader attention to tensions between two overlapping communities, "AI Ethics" and "AI Safety." In this article we (i) characterize this false binary, (ii) argue that a simple binary is not an accurate model of AI discourse, and (iii) provide concrete suggestions for how individuals can help avoid the emergence of us-vs-them conflict in the broad community of people working on AI development and governance. While we focus on "AI Ethics" an "AI Safety," the general lessons apply to related tensions, including those between accelerationist ("e/acc") and cautious stances on AI development.