Interpretable Random Forests via Rule Extraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce SIRUS (Stable and Interpretable RUle Set) for regression, a stable rule learning algorithm which takes the form of a short and simple list of rules. State-of-the-art learning algorithms are often referred to as "black boxes" because of the high number of operations involved in their prediction process. Despite their powerful predictivity, this lack of interpretability may be highly restrictive for applications with critical decisions at stake. On the other hand, algorithms with a simple structure-typically decision trees, rule algorithms, or sparse linear models-are well known for their instability. This undesirable feature makes the conclusions of the data analysis unreliable and turns out to be a strong operational limitation. This motivates the design of SIRUS, which combines a simple structure with a remarkable stable behavior when data is perturbed. The algorithm is based on random forests, the predictive accuracy of which is preserved. We demonstrate the efficiency of the method both empirically (through experiments) and theoretically (with the proof of its asymptotic stability). Our R/C++ software implementation sirus is available from CRAN.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".