mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

MIMIC-IF: Interpretability and Fairness Evaluation of Deep Learning Models on MIMIC-IV Dataset

arXiv 2102.06761 ↗First posted 12 Feb 2021cs.LG cs.AIcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The recent release of large-scale healthcare datasets has greatly propelled the research of data-driven deep learning models for healthcare applications. However, due to the nature of such deep black-boxed models, concerns about interpretability, fairness, and biases in healthcare scenarios where human lives are at stake call for a careful and thorough examinations of both datasets and models. In this work, we focus on MIMIC-IV (Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care, version IV), the largest publicly available healthcare dataset, and conduct comprehensive analyses of dataset representation bias as well as interpretability and prediction fairness of deep learning models for in-hospital mortality prediction. In terms of interpretabilty, we observe that (1) the best performing interpretability method successfully identifies critical features for mortality prediction on various prediction models; (2) demographic features are important for prediction. In terms of fairness, we observe that (1) there exists disparate treatment in prescribing mechanical ventilation among patient groups across ethnicity, gender and age; (2) all of the studied mortality predictors are generally fair while the IMV-LSTM (Interpretable Multi-Variable Long Short-Term Memory) model provides the most accurate and unbiased predictions across all protected groups. We further draw concrete connections between interpretability methods and fairness metrics by showing how feature importance from interpretability methods can be beneficial in quantifying potential disparities in mortality predictors.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 48 of its 78 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2021.

Builds on

48 of 78 references.

References · 48

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  3. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  4. 2013Deep Inside Convolutional Networks: Visualising Image Classification Models and Saliency Mapscited by 2,348
  5. 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,278
  6. 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
  7. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  8. 2017Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differencescited by 1,454
  9. 2018An Empirical Evaluation of Generic Convolutional and Recurrent Networks for Sequence Modelingcited by 1,447
  10. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,400
  11. 2017Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)cited by 1,309
  12. 2017SmoothGrad: removing noise by adding noisecited by 1,097
36 more
  1. 2014Striving for Simplicity: The All Convolutional Netcited by 983
  2. 2019Attention is not Explanationcited by 916
  3. 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 716
  4. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
  5. 2018A Benchmark for Interpretability Methods in Deep Neural Networkscited by 467
  6. 2015Evaluating the visualization of what a Deep Neural Network has learnedcited by 416
  7. 2018AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Biascited by 319
  8. 2018AutoInt: Automatic Feature Interaction Learning via Self-Attentive Neural Networkscited by 319
  9. 2017Multitask learning and benchmarking with clinical time series datacited by 287
  10. 2020Fairness without Demographics through Adversarially Reweighted Learningcited by 251
  11. 2016Recommendations as Treatments: Debiasing Learning and Evaluationcited by 246
  12. 2020Minimax Pareto Fairness: A Multi Objective Perspectivecited by 152
  13. 2018Why Is My Classifier Discriminatory?cited by 143
  14. 2019The Shapley Taylor Interaction Indexcited by 143
  15. 2019Fairness in Deep Learning: A Computational Perspectivecited by 123
  16. 2019MIMIC-Extract: A Data Extraction, Preprocessing, and Representation Pipeline for MIMIC-IIIcited by 121
  17. 2018Invariant Representations without Adversarial Trainingcited by 111
  18. 2020Explaining Explanations: Axiomatic Feature Interactions for Deep Networkscited by 103
  19. 2020Benchmarking Deep Learning Interpretability in Time Series Predictionscited by 102
  20. 2018Fairness Under Unawareness: Assessing Disparity When Protected Class Is Unobservedcited by 94
  21. 2017Detecting Statistical Interactions from Neural Network Weightscited by 80
  22. 2020Hurtful Words: Quantifying Biases in Clinical Contextual Word Embeddingscited by 79
  23. 2018Achieving Fairness through Adversarial Learning: an Application to Recidivism Predictioncited by 77
  24. 2018How Important Is a Neuron?cited by 73
  25. 2020How does this interaction affect me? Interpretable attribution for feature interactionscited by 73
  26. 2019Exploring Interpretable LSTM Neural Networks over Multi-Variable Datacited by 42
  27. 2017Clinical Intervention Prediction and Understanding using Deep Networkscited by 35
  28. 2019CERTIFAI: Counterfactual Explanations for Robustness, Transparency, Interpretability, and Fairness of Artificial Intelligence modelscited by 34
  29. 2018Influence-Directed Explanations for Deep Convolutional Networkscited by 31
  30. 2018Computationally Efficient Measures of Internal Neuron Importancecited by 19
  31. 2018Simplicity Creates Inequity: Implications for Fairness, Stereotypes, and Interpretabilitycited by 16
  32. 2016Iterative Orthogonal Feature Projection for Diagnosing Bias in Black-Box Modelscited by 12
  33. 2019Measuring Unfairness through Game-Theoretic Interpretabilitycited by 7
  34. 2019Explaining an increase in predicted risk for clinical alertscited by 5
  35. 2019Fairness Violations and Mitigation under Covariate Shiftcited by 5
  36. 2020Games for Fairness and Interpretabilitycited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 5; 2022: 5; 2023: 3; 2024: 0; 2025: 0; 2026: 2.

15 papers.

Sort: