Explaining Decision-Tree Predictions by Addressing Potential Conflicts between Predictions and Plausible Expectations

Publisher PD

Influence of context on users’ views about explanations for decision-tree predictions

This research was supported in part by grant DP190100006 from the Australian Research Council. Ethics approval for the user studies was obtained from Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (ID-24208). We thank Marko Bohanec, one of the creators of the Nursery dataset, for helping us understand the features and their values. We are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.Peer reviewedPostprin

Turning Flowchart into Dialog: Plan-based Data Augmentation for Low-Resource Flowchart-grounded Troubleshooting Dialogs

Flowchart-grounded troubleshooting dialogue (FTD) systems, which follow the instructions of a flowchart to diagnose users' problems in specific domains (eg., vehicle, laptop), have been gaining research interest in recent years. However, collecting sufficient dialogues that are naturally grounded on flowcharts is costly, thus FTD systems are impeded by scarce training data. To mitigate the data sparsity issue, we propose a plan-based data augmentation (PlanDA) approach that generates diverse synthetic dialog data at scale by transforming concise flowchart into dialogues. Specifically, its generative model employs a variational-base framework with a hierarchical planning strategy that includes global and local latent planning variables. Experiments on the FloDial dataset show that synthetic dialogue produced by PlanDA improves the performance of downstream tasks, including flowchart path retrieval and response generation, in particular on the Out-of-Flowchart settings. In addition, further analysis demonstrate the quality of synthetic data generated by PlanDA in paths that are covered by current sample dialogues and paths that are not covered

BARD : a structured technique for group elicitation of Bayesian networks to support analytic reasoning

In many complex, real-world situations, problem solving and decision making require effective reasoning about causation and uncertainty. However, human reasoning in these cases is prone to confusion and error. Bayesian networks (BNs) are an artificial intelligence technology that models uncertain situations, supporting better probabilistic and causal reasoning and decision making. However, to date, BN methodologies and software require (but do not include) substantial upfront training, do not provide much guidance on either the model building process or on using the model for reasoning and reporting, and provide no support for building BNs collaboratively. Here, we contribute a detailed description and motivation for our new methodology and application, Bayesian ARgumentation via Delphi (BARD). BARD utilizes BNs and addresses these shortcomings by integrating (1) short, high-quality e-courses, tips, and help on demand; (2) a stepwise, iterative, and incremental BN construction process; (3) report templates and an automated explanation tool; and (4) a multiuser web-based software platform and Delphi-style social processes. The result is an end-to-end online platform, with associated online training, for groups without prior BN expertise to understand and analyze a problem, build a model of its underlying probabilistic causal structure, validate and reason with the causal model, and (optionally) use it to produce a written analytic report. Initial experiments demonstrate that, for suitable problems, BARD aids in reasoning and reporting. Comparing their effect sizes also suggests BARD's BN-building and collaboration combine beneficially and cumulatively