mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

ML Interpretability: Simple Isn't Easy

arXiv 2211.13617 ↗First posted 24 Nov 2022cs.LG cs.CYcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The interpretability of ML models is important, but it is not clear what it amounts to. So far, most philosophers have discussed the lack of interpretability of black-box models such as neural networks, and methods such as explainable AI that aim to make these models more transparent. The goal of this paper is to clarify the nature of interpretability by focussing on the other end of the 'interpretability spectrum'. The reasons why some models, linear models and decision trees, are highly interpretable will be examined, and also how more general models, MARS and GAM, retain some degree of interpretability. I find that while there is heterogeneity in how we gain interpretability, what interpretability is in particular cases can be explicated in a clear manner.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 4 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Nov 2022.

Builds on

4 of 41 references.

References · 4

  1. 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
  2. 2016The Mythos of Model Interpretabilitycited by 721
  3. 2021The Modern Mathematics of Deep Learningcited by 63
  4. 2022The no-free-lunch theorems of supervised learningcited by 16

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 1; 2024: 1; 2025: 5.

7 papers.