MétaCan
← all works

Definitions, methods, and applications in interpretable machine learning

2019· article· en· 2,077 citations· W2910705748 on OpenAlex· 10.1073/pnas.1900654116

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian funderA Canadian agency funded it. The work may carry no Canadian affiliation at all.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Abstract

Machine-learning models have demonstrated great success in learning complex patterns that enable them to make predictions about unobserved data. In addition to using models for prediction, the ability to interpret what a model has learned is receiving an increasing amount of attention. However, this increased focus has led to considerable confusion about the notion of interpretability. In particular, it is unclear how the wide array of proposed interpretation methods are related and what common concepts can be used to evaluate them. We aim to address these concerns by defining interpretability in the context of machine learning and introducing the predictive, descriptive, relevant (PDR) framework for discussing interpretations. The PDR framework provides 3 overarching desiderata for evaluation: predictive accuracy, descriptive accuracy, and relevancy, with relevancy judged relative to a human audience. Moreover, to help manage the deluge of interpretation methods, we introduce a categorization of existing techniques into model-based and post hoc categories, with subgroups including sparsity, modularity, and simulatability. To demonstrate how practitioners can use the PDR framework to evaluate and understand interpretations, we provide numerous real-world examples. These examples highlight the often underappreciated role played by human audiences in discussions of interpretability. Finally, based on our framework, we discuss limitations of existing methods and directions for future work. We hope that this work will provide a common vocabulary that will make it easier for both practitioners and researchers to discuss and choose from the full range of interpretation methods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Topic
Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Field
Computer Science
Canadian institutions
Funders
Army Research OfficeOffice of Naval ResearchU.S. ArmyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. NavyGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
Keywords
InterpretabilityComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceCategorizationMachine learningContext (archaeology)Interpretation (philosophy)Modularity (biology)VocabularyData scienceFocus (optics)
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes