Sound Explanation for Trustworthy Machine Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We take a formal approach to the explainability problem of machine learning systems. We argue against the practice of interpreting black-box models via attributing scores to input components due to inherently conflicting goals of attribution-based interpretation. We prove that no attribution algorithm satisfies specificity, additivity, completeness, and baseline invariance. We then formalize the concept, sound explanation, that has been informally adopted in prior work. A sound explanation entails providing sufficient information to causally explain the predictions made by a system. Finally, we present the application of feature selection as a sound explanation for cancer prediction models to cultivate trust among clinicians.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 20 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Jun 2023.
Builds on
10 of 20 references.
References · 10
- 2016"Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifiercited by 5,070
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
- 2013Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networkscited by 2,290
- 2017Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learningcited by 1,416
- 2020Concept Bottleneck Modelscited by 1,032
- 2018Multimodal Explanations: Justifying Decisions and Pointing to the Evidencecited by 179
- 2022The Disagreement Problem in Explainable Machine Learning: A Practitioner's Perspectivecited by 159
- 2021Designing Inherently Interpretable Machine Learning Modelscited by 23
- 2021Self-explaining Neural Network with Concept-based Explanations for ICU Mortality Predictioncited by 2
- 2023Effective Neural Network L0 Regularization With BinMaskcited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.