Interpreting Temporal Shifts in Global Annual Data Using Local Surrogate Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on explaining changes over time in globally sourced annual temporal data with the specific objective of identifying features in black-box models that contribute to these temporal shifts. Leveraging local explanations, a part of explainable machine learning/XAI, can yield explanations behind a country’s growth or downfall after making economic or social decisions. We employ a Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanation (LIME) to shed light on national happiness indices, economic freedom, and population metrics, spanning variable time frames. Acknowledging the presence of missing values, we employ three imputation approaches to generate robust multivariate temporal datasets apt for LIME’s input requirements. Our methodology’s efficacy is substantiated through a series of empirical evaluations involving multiple datasets. These evaluations include comparative analyses against random feature selection, correlation with real-world events as explained using LIME, and validation through Individual Conditional Expectation (ICE) plots, a state-of-the-art technique proficient in feature importance detection.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".