IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q3 CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL
Alec Lamens, Jürgen Bajorath
{"title":"Comparing Explanations of Molecular Machine Learning Models Generated with Different Methods for the Calculation of Shapley Values.","authors":"Alec Lamens, Jürgen Bajorath","doi":"10.1002/minf.202500067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Feature attribution methods from explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) provide explanations of machine learning models by quantifying feature importance for predictions of test instances. While features determining individual predictions have frequently been identified in machine learning applications, the consistency of feature importance-based explanations of machine learning models using different attribution methods has not been thoroughly investigated. We have systematically compared model explanations in molecular machine learning. Therefore, a test system of highly accurate compound activity predictions for different targets using different machine learning methods was generated. For these predictions, explanations were computed using methodological variants of the Shapley value formalism, a popular feature attribution approach in machine learning adapted from game theory. Predictions of each model were assessed using a model-agnostic and model-specific Shapley value-based method. The resulting feature importance distributions were characterized and compared by a global statistical analysis using diverse measures. Unexpectedly, methodological variants for Shapley value calculations yielded distinct feature importance distributions for highly accurate predictions. There was only little agreement between alternative model explanations. Our findings suggest that feature importance-based explanations of machine learning predictions should include an assessment of consistency using alternative methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":18853,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Informatics","volume":"44 3","pages":"e202500067"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11925390/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/minf.202500067","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

可解释人工智能(XAI)的特征归因方法通过量化特征对测试实例预测的重要性来解释机器学习模型。虽然在机器学习应用中,决定单个预测的特征经常被识别出来,但使用不同归因方法对机器学习模型进行的基于特征重要性的解释的一致性尚未得到深入研究。我们系统地比较了分子机器学习中的模型解释。因此,我们利用不同的机器学习方法生成了一个针对不同靶点的高精度化合物活性预测测试系统。对于这些预测,我们使用沙普利值形式主义的方法变体来计算解释,沙普利值形式主义是机器学习中一种流行的特征归因方法,由博弈论改编而来。使用基于 Shapley 值的模型无关和特定模型方法对每个模型的预测进行了评估。通过使用不同的测量方法进行全局统计分析,对得出的特征重要性分布进行了表征和比较。出乎意料的是,夏普利值计算方法的变体产生了不同的特征重要性分布,从而实现了高度准确的预测。替代模型解释之间的一致性很低。我们的研究结果表明,基于特征重要性的机器学习预测解释应包括使用替代方法对一致性进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing Explanations of Molecular Machine Learning Models Generated with Different Methods for the Calculation of Shapley Values.

Feature attribution methods from explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) provide explanations of machine learning models by quantifying feature importance for predictions of test instances. While features determining individual predictions have frequently been identified in machine learning applications, the consistency of feature importance-based explanations of machine learning models using different attribution methods has not been thoroughly investigated. We have systematically compared model explanations in molecular machine learning. Therefore, a test system of highly accurate compound activity predictions for different targets using different machine learning methods was generated. For these predictions, explanations were computed using methodological variants of the Shapley value formalism, a popular feature attribution approach in machine learning adapted from game theory. Predictions of each model were assessed using a model-agnostic and model-specific Shapley value-based method. The resulting feature importance distributions were characterized and compared by a global statistical analysis using diverse measures. Unexpectedly, methodological variants for Shapley value calculations yielded distinct feature importance distributions for highly accurate predictions. There was only little agreement between alternative model explanations. Our findings suggest that feature importance-based explanations of machine learning predictions should include an assessment of consistency using alternative methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Molecular Informatics
Molecular Informatics CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL-MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
70
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Molecular Informatics is a peer-reviewed, international forum for publication of high-quality, interdisciplinary research on all molecular aspects of bio/cheminformatics and computer-assisted molecular design. Molecular Informatics succeeded QSAR & Combinatorial Science in 2010. Molecular Informatics presents methodological innovations that will lead to a deeper understanding of ligand-receptor interactions, macromolecular complexes, molecular networks, design concepts and processes that demonstrate how ideas and design concepts lead to molecules with a desired structure or function, preferably including experimental validation. The journal''s scope includes but is not limited to the fields of drug discovery and chemical biology, protein and nucleic acid engineering and design, the design of nanomolecular structures, strategies for modeling of macromolecular assemblies, molecular networks and systems, pharmaco- and chemogenomics, computer-assisted screening strategies, as well as novel technologies for the de novo design of biologically active molecules. As a unique feature Molecular Informatics publishes so-called "Methods Corner" review-type articles which feature important technological concepts and advances within the scope of the journal.
×
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