Clarity in complexity: how aggregating explanations resolves the disagreement problem

被引:0
|
作者
Mitruț, Oana [1 ]
Moise, Gabriela [2 ]
Moldoveanu, Alin [1 ]
Moldoveanu, Florica [1 ]
Leordeanu, Marius [1 ]
Petrescu, Livia [3 ]
机构
[1] Faculty of Automatic Control and Computers, National University of Science and Technology POLITEHNICA Bucharest, Bucharest,060042, Romania
[2] Faculty of Letters and Sciences, Petroleum-Gas University of Ploiesti, Ploiesti,100680, Romania
[3] Faculty of Biology, University of Bucharest, Bucharest,010014, Romania
关键词
Explainability; Classification; Case based reasoning; Disagreement problem; Rashômon effect;
D O I
10.1007/s10462-024-10952-7
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The Rashômon Effect, applied in Explainable Machine Learning, refers to the disagreement between the explanations provided by various attribution explainers and to the dissimilarity across multiple explanations generated by a particular explainer for a single instance from the dataset (differences between feature importances and their associated signs and ranks), an undesirable outcome especially in sensitive domains such as healthcare or finance. We propose a method inspired from textual-case based reasoning for aligning explanations from various explainers in order to resolve the disagreement and dissimilarity problems. We iteratively generated a number of 100 explanations for each instance from six popular datasets, using three prevalent feature attribution explainers: LIME, Anchors and SHAP (with the variations Tree SHAP and Kernel SHAP) and consequently applied a global cluster-based aggregation strategy that quantifies alignment and reveals similarities and associations between explanations. We evaluated our method by weighting the \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\:k$$\end{document}-NN algorithm with agreed feature overlap explanation weights and compared it to a non-weighted \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\:k$$\end{document}-NN predictor, having as task binary classification. Also, we compared the results of the weighted \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\:k$$\end{document}-NN algorithm using aggregated feature overlap explanation weights to the weighted \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\:k$$\end{document}-NN algorithm using weights produced by a single explanation method (either LIME, SHAP or Anchors). Our global alignment method benefited the most from a hybridization with feature importance scores (information gain), that was essential for acquiring a more accurate estimate of disagreement, for enabling explainers to reach a consensus across multiple explanations and for supporting effective model learning through improved classification performance.
引用
下载
收藏
相关论文
共 18 条
  • [1] Disagreement amongst counterfactual explanations: how transparency can be misleading
    Brughmans, Dieter
    Melis, Lissa
    Martens, David
    TOP, 2024, 32 (3) : 429 - 462
  • [2] How is moral disagreement a problem for realism?
    Enoch D.
    The Journal of Ethics, 2009, 13 (1) : 15 - 50
  • [3] The Blame Problem in Evaluating Local Explanations and How to Tackle It
    Hossein, Amir
    Rahnama, Akhavan
    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-ECAI 2023 INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOPS, PT 1, XAI3, TACTIFUL, XI-ML, SEDAMI, RAAIT, AI4S, HYDRA, AI4AI, 2023, 2024, 1947 : 66 - 86
  • [4] Birds of a feather: how manager-subordinate disagreement on goal clarity influences value congruence and organizational commitment
    Stazyk, Edmund C.
    Davis, Randall S.
    INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES, 2021, 87 (01) : 39 - 59
  • [5] The Looping Structure of Buddhist Thought (Or, How Chan Buddhism Resolves the Quantum Measurement Problem)
    Sharf, Robert H.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF RELIGION, 2021, 89 (03) : 1039 - 1073
  • [6] From complexity to clarity: How AI enhances perceptions of scientists and the public's understanding of science
    Markowitz, David M.
    PNAS NEXUS, 2024, 3 (09):
  • [7] How Complex Is Your Classification Problem?: A Survey on Measuring Classification Complexity
    Lorena, Ana C.
    Garcia, Luis P. F.
    Lehmann, Jens
    Souto, Marcilio C. P.
    Ho, Tin Kam
    ACM COMPUTING SURVEYS, 2019, 52 (05)
  • [8] From complexity to clarity: how directed acyclic graphs enhance the study design of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Stijntje W. Dijk
    Lisa M. Caulley
    Myriam Hunink
    Jeremy Labrecque
    European Journal of Epidemiology, 2024, 39 (1) : 27 - 33
  • [9] From complexity to clarity: how directed acyclic graphs enhance the study design of systematic reviews and meta-analyses
    Dijk, Stijntje W.
    Caulley, Lisa M.
    Hunink, Myriam
    Labrecque, Jeremy
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2024, 39 (01) : 27 - 33
  • [10] How people do relational reasoning? Role of problem complexity and domain familiarity
    Kumar, Shikhar
    Cervesato, Iliano
    Gonzalez, Cleotilde
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2014, 41 : 319 - 326