mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Toward a Taxonomy of Trust for Probabilistic Machine Learning

arXiv 2112.03270 ↗First posted 5 Dec 2021cs.LG stat.MEcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Probabilistic machine learning increasingly informs critical decisions in medicine, economics, politics, and beyond. We need evidence to support that the resulting decisions are well-founded. To aid development of trust in these decisions, we develop a taxonomy delineating where trust in an analysis can break down: (1) in the translation of real-world goals to goals on a particular set of available training data, (2) in the translation of abstract goals on the training data to a concrete mathematical problem, (3) in the use of an algorithm to solve the stated mathematical problem, and (4) in the use of a particular code implementation of the chosen algorithm. We detail how trust can fail at each step and illustrate our taxonomy with two case studies: an analysis of the efficacy of microcredit and The Economist's predictions of the 2020 US presidential election. Finally, we describe a wide variety of methods that can be used to increase trust at each step of our taxonomy. The use of our taxonomy highlights steps where existing research work on trust tends to concentrate and also steps where establishing trust is particularly challenging.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 98 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Dec 2021.

Builds on

28 of 98 references.

References · 28

  1. 2016Adversarial examples in the physical worldcited by 1,762
  2. 2019Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI): Concepts, Taxonomies, Opportunities and Challenges toward Responsible AIcited by 1,543
  3. 2016Variational Inference: A Review for Statisticianscited by 1,466
  4. 2018Datasheets for Datasetscited by 1,371
  5. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,068
  6. 2020Beyond Accuracy: Behavioral Testing of NLP models with CheckListcited by 979
  7. 2020Underspecification Presents Challenges for Credibility in Modern Machine Learningcited by 488
  8. 2020Effect of Confidence and Explanation on Accuracy and Trust Calibration in AI-Assisted Decision Makingcited by 281
  9. 2018To Trust Or Not To Trust A Classifiercited by 205
  10. 2020Formalizing Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Prerequisites, Causes and Goals of Human Trust in AIcited by 166
  11. 2018Explaining Explanations in AIcited by 136
  12. 2018Validating Bayesian Inference Algorithms with Simulation-Based Calibrationcited by 118
16 more
  1. 2019Problem Formulation and Fairnesscited by 85
  2. 2019The relationship between trust in AI and trustworthy machine learning technologiescited by 78
  3. 2020When Machine Learning Meets Privacy: A Survey and Outlookcited by 67
  4. 2019Veridical Data Sciencecited by 65
  5. 2018Yes, but Did It Work?: Evaluating Variational Inferencecited by 52
  6. 2017Covariances, Robustness, and Variational Bayescited by 39
  7. 2020An Automatic Finite-Sample Robustness Metric: When Can Dropping a Little Data Make a Big Difference?cited by 27
  8. 2019Validated Variational Inference via Practical Posterior Error Boundscited by 26
  9. 2017Visualization in Bayesian workflowcited by 25
  10. 2015Linear Response Methods for Accurate Covariance Estimates from Mean Field Variational Bayescited by 14
  11. 2017The Geometry of Continuous Latent Space Models for Network Datacited by 11
  12. 2020Identifying the latent space geometry of network models through analysis of curvaturecited by 11
  13. 2020Approximate Cross-Validation for Structured Modelscited by 9
  14. 2021Evaluating Sensitivity to the Stick-Breaking Prior in Bayesian Nonparametricscited by 4
  15. 2020Next Waves in Veridical Network Embeddingcited by 3
  16. 2016Fast robustness quantification with variational Bayescited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 2; 2025: 3.

8 papers.