CHIME: Causal Human-in-the-Loop Model Explanations

S. Biswas, L. Corti, Stefan Buijsman, Jie Yang
{"title":"CHIME: Causal Human-in-the-Loop Model Explanations","authors":"S. Biswas, L. Corti, Stefan Buijsman, Jie Yang","doi":"10.1609/hcomp.v10i1.21985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Explaining the behaviour of Artificial Intelligence models has become a necessity. Their opaqueness and fragility are not tolerable in high-stakes domains especially. Although considerable progress is being made in the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence, scholars have demonstrated limits and flaws of existing approaches: explanations requiring further interpretation, non-standardised explanatory format, and overall fragility. In light of this fragmentation, we turn to the field of philosophy of science to understand what constitutes a good explanation, that is, a generalisation that covers both the actual outcome and, possibly multiple, counterfactual outcomes. Inspired by this, we propose CHIME: a human-in-the-loop, post-hoc approach focused on creating such explanations by establishing the causal features in the input. We first elicit people's cognitive abilities to understand what parts of the input the model might be attending to. Then, through Causal Discovery we uncover the underlying causal graph relating the different concepts. Finally, with such a structure, we compute the causal effects different concepts have towards a model's outcome. We evaluate the Fidelity, Coherence, and Accuracy of the explanations obtained with CHIME with respect to two state-of-the-art Computer Vision models trained on real-world image data sets. We found evidence that the explanations reflect the causal concepts tied to a model's prediction, both in terms of causal strength and accuracy.","PeriodicalId":87339,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the ... AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1609/hcomp.v10i1.21985","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Explaining the behaviour of Artificial Intelligence models has become a necessity. Their opaqueness and fragility are not tolerable in high-stakes domains especially. Although considerable progress is being made in the field of Explainable Artificial Intelligence, scholars have demonstrated limits and flaws of existing approaches: explanations requiring further interpretation, non-standardised explanatory format, and overall fragility. In light of this fragmentation, we turn to the field of philosophy of science to understand what constitutes a good explanation, that is, a generalisation that covers both the actual outcome and, possibly multiple, counterfactual outcomes. Inspired by this, we propose CHIME: a human-in-the-loop, post-hoc approach focused on creating such explanations by establishing the causal features in the input. We first elicit people's cognitive abilities to understand what parts of the input the model might be attending to. Then, through Causal Discovery we uncover the underlying causal graph relating the different concepts. Finally, with such a structure, we compute the causal effects different concepts have towards a model's outcome. We evaluate the Fidelity, Coherence, and Accuracy of the explanations obtained with CHIME with respect to two state-of-the-art Computer Vision models trained on real-world image data sets. We found evidence that the explanations reflect the causal concepts tied to a model's prediction, both in terms of causal strength and accuracy.
因果人在循环模型解释
解释人工智能模型的行为已经成为一种必要。尤其是在高风险领域,它们的不透明性和脆弱性是不可容忍的。尽管在可解释人工智能领域取得了相当大的进展,但学者们已经证明了现有方法的局限性和缺陷:解释需要进一步解释,解释格式不标准化,整体脆弱性。鉴于这种分裂,我们转向科学哲学领域来理解什么构成了一个好的解释,也就是说,一个涵盖实际结果和可能多重的反事实结果的概括。受此启发,我们提出了CHIME:一种人在循环,事后处理的方法,专注于通过在输入中建立因果特征来创建这样的解释。我们首先引出人们的认知能力,以理解模型可能关注的输入的哪些部分。然后,通过因果发现,我们揭示了与不同概念相关的潜在因果图。最后,通过这样的结构,我们计算了不同概念对模型结果的因果关系。我们评估了保真度,一致性和准确性的解释与CHIME相对于两个最先进的计算机视觉模型训练真实世界的图像数据集。我们发现有证据表明,这些解释反映了与模型预测相关的因果概念,无论是在因果强度还是准确性方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信