Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): What we know and what is left to attain Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No. 2021R1A2C1011198) , (Institute for Information & communications Technology Planning & Evaluation) (IITP) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) under the ICT Creative Consilience Program (IITP-2021-2020-0-01821) , and AI Platform to Fully Adapt and Reflect Privacy-Policy Changes (No. 2022-0-00688).Artificial intelligence (AI) is currently being utilized in a wide range of sophisticated applications, but the outcomes of many AI models are challenging to comprehend and trust due to their black-box nature. Usually, it is essential to understand the reasoning behind an AI mode ľs decision-making. Thus, the need for eXplainable AI (XAI) methods for improving trust in AI models has arisen. XAI has become a popular research subject within the AI field in recent years. Existing survey papers have tackled the concepts of XAI, its general terms, and post-hoc explainability methods but there have not been any reviews that have looked at the assessment methods, available tools, XAI datasets, and other related aspects. Therefore, in this comprehensive study, we provide readers with an overview of the current research and trends in this rapidly emerging area with a case study example. The study starts by explaining the background of XAI, common definitions, and summarizing recently proposed techniques in XAI for supervised machine learning. The review divides XAI techniques into four axes using a hierarchical categorization system: (i) data explainability, (ii) model explainability, (iii) post-hoc explainability, and (iv) assessment of explanations. We also introduce available evaluation metrics as well as open-source packages and datasets with future research directions. Then, the significance of explainability in terms of legal demands, user viewpoints, and application orientation is outlined, termed as XAI concerns. This paper advocates for tailoring explanation content to specific user types. An examination of XAI techniques and evaluation was conducted by looking at 410 critical articles, published between January 2016 and October 2022, in reputed journals and using a wide range of research databases as a source of information. The article is aimed at XAI researchers who are interested in making their AI models more trustworthy, as well as towards researchers from other disciplines who are looking for effective XAI methods to complete tasks with confidence while communicating meaning from data.National Research Foundation of Korea Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning, Republic of Korea Ministry of Science & ICT (MSIT), Republic of Korea 2021R1A2C1011198Institute for Information amp; communications Technology Planning amp; Evaluation) (IITP) - Korea government (MSIT) under the ICT Creative Consilience Program IITP-2021-2020-0-01821AI Platform to Fully Adapt and Reflect Privacy-Policy Changes2022-0-0068

The role of explainability in creating trustworthy artificial intelligence for health care: A comprehensive survey of the terminology, design choices, and evaluation strategies

Artificial intelligence (AI) has huge potential to improve the health and well-being of people, but adoption in clinical practice is still limited. Lack of transparency is identified as one of the main barriers to implementation, as clinicians should be confident the AI system can be trusted. Explainable AI has the potential to overcome this issue and can be a step towards trustworthy AI. In this paper we review the recent literature to provide guidance to rese

Pixel-Grounded Prototypical Part Networks

Prototypical part neural networks (ProtoPartNNs), namely PROTOPNET and its derivatives, are an intrinsically interpretable approach to machine learning. Their prototype learning scheme enables intuitive explanations of the form, this (prototype) looks like that (testing image patch). But, does this actually look like that? In this work, we delve into why object part localization and associated heat maps in past work are misleading. Rather than localizing to object parts, existing ProtoPartNNs localize to the entire image, contrary to generated explanatory visualizations. We argue that detraction from these underlying issues is due to the alluring nature of visualizations and an over-reliance on intuition. To alleviate these issues, we devise new receptive field-based architectural constraints for meaningful localization and a principled pixel space mapping for ProtoPartNNs. To improve interpretability, we propose additional architectural improvements, including a simplified classification head. We also make additional corrections to PROTOPNET and its derivatives, such as the use of a validation set, rather than a test set, to evaluate generalization during training. Our approach, PIXPNET (Pixel-grounded Prototypical part Network), is the only ProtoPartNN that truly learns and localizes to prototypical object parts. We demonstrate that PIXPNET achieves quantifiably improved interpretability without sacrificing accuracy.Comment: 21 page

How Well Do Feature-Additive Explainers Explain Feature-Additive Predictors?

Surging interest in deep learning from high-stakes domains has precipitated concern over the inscrutable nature of black box neural networks. Explainable AI (XAI) research has led to an abundance of explanation algorithms for these black boxes. Such post hoc explainers produce human-comprehensible explanations, however, their fidelity with respect to the model is not well understood - explanation evaluation remains one of the most challenging issues in XAI. In this paper, we ask a targeted but important question: can popular feature-additive explainers (e.g., LIME, SHAP, SHAPR, MAPLE, and PDP) explain feature-additive predictors? Herein, we evaluate such explainers on ground truth that is analytically derived from the additive structure of a model. We demonstrate the efficacy of our approach in understanding these explainers applied to symbolic expressions, neural networks, and generalized additive models on thousands of synthetic and several real-world tasks. Our results suggest that all explainers eventually fail to correctly attribute the importance of features, especially when a decision-making process involves feature interactions.Comment: Accepted to NeurIPS Workshop XAI in Action: Past, Present, and Future Applications. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:2106.0837

Greybox XAI: a Neural-Symbolic learning framework to produce interpretable predictions for image classification

Although Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have great generalization and prediction capabilities, their functioning does not allow a detailed explanation of their behavior. Opaque deep learning models are increasingly used to make important predictions in critical environments, and the danger is that they make and use predictions that cannot be justified or legitimized. Several eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods that separate explanations from machine learning models have emerged, but have shortcomings in faithfulness to the model actual functioning and robustness. As a result, there is a widespread agreement on the importance of endowing Deep Learning models with explanatory capabilities so that they can themselves provide an answer to why a particular prediction was made. First, we address the problem of the lack of universal criteria for XAI by formalizing what an explanation is. We also introduced a set of axioms and definitions to clarify XAI from a mathematical perspective. Finally, we present the Greybox XAI, a framework that composes a DNN and a transparent model thanks to the use of a symbolic Knowledge Base (KB). We extract a KB from the dataset and use it to train a transparent model (i.e., a logistic regression). An encoder-decoder architecture is trained on RGB images to produce an output similar to the KB used by the transparent model. Once the two models are trained independently, they are used compositionally to form an explainable predictive model. We show how this new architecture is accurate and explainable in several datasets.French ANRT (AssociationNationale Recherche Technologie - ANRT)SEGULA TechnologiesJuan de la Cierva Incorporacion grant - MCIN/AEI by "ESF Investing in your future" I JC2019-039152-IGoogle Research Scholar ProgramDepartment of Education of the Basque Government (Consolidated Research Group MATHMODE) IT1456-2

Design and Evaluation of User-Centered Explanations for Machine Learning Model Predictions in Healthcare

Challenges in interpreting some high-performing models present complications in applying machine learning (ML) techniques to healthcare problems. Recently, there has been rapid growth in research on model interpretability; however, approaches to explaining complex ML models are rarely informed by end-user needs and user evaluations of model interpretability are lacking, especially in healthcare. This makes it challenging to determine what explanation approaches might enable providers to understand model predictions in a comprehensible and useful way. Therefore, I aimed to utilize clinician perspectives to inform the design of explanations for ML-based prediction tools and improve the adoption of these systems in practice. In this dissertation, I proposed a new theoretical framework for designing user-centered explanations for ML-based systems. I then utilized the framework to propose explanation designs for predictions from a pediatric in-hospital mortality risk model. I conducted focus groups with healthcare providers to obtain feedback on the proposed designs, which was used to inform the design of a user-centered explanation. The user-centered explanation was evaluated in a laboratory study to assess its effect on healthcare provider perceptions of the model and decision-making processes. The results demonstrated that the user-centered explanation design improved provider perceptions of utilizing the predictive model in practice, but exhibited no significant effect on provider accuracy, confidence, or efficiency in making decisions. Limitations of the evaluation study design, including a small sample size, may have affected the ability to detect an impact on decision-making. Nonetheless, the predictive model with the user-centered explanation was positively received by healthcare providers, and demonstrated a viable approach to explaining ML model predictions in healthcare. Future work is required to address the limitations of this study and further explore the potential benefits of user-centered explanation designs for predictive models in healthcare. This work contributes a new theoretical framework for user-centered explanation design for ML-based systems that is generalizable outside the domain of healthcare. Moreover, the work provides meaningful insights into the role of model interpretability and explanation in healthcare while advancing the discussion on how to effectively communicate ML model information to healthcare providers