Error-controlled non-additive interaction discovery in machine learning models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) models are powerful tools for detecting complex patterns, yet their 'black-box' nature limits their interpretability, hindering their use in critical domains like healthcare and finance. Interpretable ML methods aim to explain how features influence model predictions but often focus on univariate feature importance, overlooking complex feature interactions. Although recent efforts extend interpretability to feature interactions, existing approaches struggle with robustness and error control, especially under data perturbations. In this study, we introduce Diamond, a method for trustworthy feature interaction discovery. Diamond uniquely integrates the model-X knockoffs framework to control the false discovery rate, ensuring a low proportion of falsely detected interactions. Diamond includes a non-additivity distillation procedure that refines existing interaction importance measures to isolate non-additive interaction effects and preserve false discovery rate control. This approach addresses the limitations of off-the-shelf interaction measures, which, when used naively, can lead to inaccurate discoveries. Diamond's applicability spans a broad class of ML models, including deep neural networks, transformers, tree-based models and factorization-based models. Empirical evaluations on both simulated and real datasets across various biomedical studies demonstrate its utility in enabling reliable data-driven scientific discoveries. Diamond represents a significant step forward in leveraging ML for scientific innovation and hypothesis generation.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it