# A Concept and Argumentation based Interpretable Model in High Risk Domains

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.08149 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.08149/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 17 of its 31 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 17 Aug 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 17 of 17)

- [Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1502.03167/) (2015)
- [A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1705.07874/) (2017)
- [XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1603.02754/) (2016)
- ["Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1602.04938/) (2016)
- [Interpretability Beyond Feature Attribution: Quantitative Testing with Concept Activation Vectors (TCAV)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.11279/) (2017)
- [This Looks Like That: Deep Learning for Interpretable Image Recognition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.10574/) (2018)
- [Making Monolingual Sentence Embeddings Multilingual using Knowledge Distillation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.09813/) (2020)
- [Empirical Evaluation of Rectified Activations in Convolutional Network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1505.00853/) (2015)
- [Fooling LIME and SHAP: Adversarial Attacks on Post hoc Explanation Methods](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.02508/) (2019)
- [NODE-GAM: Neural Generalized Additive Model for Interpretable Deep Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01613/) (2021)
- [DANets: Deep Abstract Networks for Tabular Data Classification and Regression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.02962/) (2021)
- [How Interpretable and Trustworthy are GAMs?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.06466/) (2020)
- [AutoCross: Automatic Feature Crossing for Tabular Data in Real-World Applications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1904.12857/) (2019)
- [Interpreting Neural Networks as Gradual Argumentation Frameworks (Including Proof Appendix)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.05738/) (2020)
- [An Interpretable Model with Globally Consistent Explanations for Credit Risk](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1811.12615/) (2018)
- [Contrastive Explanations for Argumentation-Based Conclusions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03265/) (2021)
- [Beyond Importance Scores: Interpreting Tabular ML by Visualizing Feature Semantics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.05898/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Interpretability has become an essential topic for artificial intelligence in some high-risk domains such as healthcare, bank and security. For commonly-used tabular data, traditional methods trained end-to-end machine learning models with numerical and categorical data only, and did not leverage human understandable knowledge such as data descriptions. Yet mining human-level knowledge from tabular data and using it for prediction remain a challenge. Therefore, we propose a concept and argumentation based model (CAM) that includes the following two components: a novel concept mining method to obtain human understandable concepts and their relations from both descriptions of features and the underlying data, and a quantitative argumentation-based method to do knowledge representation and reasoning. As a result of it, CAM provides decisions that are based on human-level knowledge and the reasoning process is intrinsically interpretable. Finally, to visualize the purposed interpretable model, we provide a dialogical explanation that contain dominated reasoning path within CAM. Experimental results on both open source benchmark dataset and real-word business dataset show that (1) CAM is transparent and interpretable, and the knowledge inside the CAM is coherent with human understanding; (2) Our interpretable approach can reach competitive results comparing with other state-of-art models.