Decision trees have long been recognized as models of choice in sensitive applications where interpretability is of paramount importance. In this paper, we examine the computational ability of Boolean decision trees in deriving, minimizing, and counting sufficient reasons and contrastive explanations. We prove that the set of all sufficient reasons of minimal size for an instance given a decision tree can be exponentially larger than the size of the input (the instance and the decision tree). Therefore, generating the full set of sufficient reasons can be out of reach. In addition, computing a single sufficient reason does not prove enough in general; indeed, two sufficient reasons for the same instance may differ on many features. To deal with this issue and generate synthetic views of the set of all sufficient reasons, we introduce the notions of relevant features and of necessary features that characterize the (possibly negated) features appearing in at least one or in every sufficient reason, and we show that they can be computed in polynomial time. We also introduce the notion of explanatory importance, that indicates how frequent each (possibly negated) feature is in the set of all sufficient reasons. We show how the explanatory importance of a feature and the number of sufficient reasons can be obtained via a model counting operation, which turns out to be practical in many cases. We also explain how to enumerate sufficient reasons of minimal size. We finally show that, unlike sufficient reasons, the set of all contrastive explanations for an instance given a decision tree can be derived, minimized and counted in polynomial time.

This Blog assumes that the reader is familiar with the concept of Decision Trees and Regression. If not, refer to the blogs below. Having read the above blogs or Having already being familiar with the appropriate topics, you hopefully understand what is a decision tree, by now ( The one we used for classification task). A regression tree is basically a decision tree that is used for the task of regression which can be used to predict continuous valued outputs instead of discrete outputs. In Decision Trees for Classification, we saw how the tree asks right questions at the right node in order to give accurate and efficient classifications.

For robots to operate in a three dimensional world and interact with humans, learning spatial relationships among objects in the surrounding is necessary. Reasoning about the state of the world requires inputs from many different sensory modalities including vision ($V$) and haptics ($H$). We examine the problem of desk organization: learning how humans spatially position different objects on a planar surface according to organizational ''preference''. We model this problem by examining how humans position objects given multiple features received from vision and haptic modalities. However, organizational habits vary greatly between people both in structure and adherence. To deal with user organizational preferences, we add an additional modality, ''utility'' ($U$), which informs on a particular human's perceived usefulness of a given object. Models were trained as generalized (over many different people) or tailored (per person). We use two types of models: random forests, which focus on precise multi-task classification, and Markov logic networks, which provide an easily interpretable insight into organizational habits. The models were applied to both synthetic data, which proved to be learnable when using fixed organizational constraints, and human-study data, on which the random forest achieved over 90% accuracy. Over all combinations of $\{H, U, V\}$ modalities, $UV$ and $HUV$ were the most informative for organization. In a follow-up study, we gauged participants preference of desk organizations by a generalized random forest organization vs. by a random model. On average, participants rated the random forest models as 4.15 on a 5-point Likert scale compared to 1.84 for the random model

Connected vehicles (CVs), because of the external connectivity with other CVs and connected infrastructure, are vulnerable to cyberattacks that can instantly compromise the safety of the vehicle itself and other connected vehicles and roadway infrastructure. One such cyberattack is the false information attack, where an external attacker injects inaccurate information into the connected vehicles and eventually can cause catastrophic consequences by compromising safety-critical applications like the forward collision warning. The occurrence and target of such attack events can be very dynamic, making real-time and near-real-time detection challenging. Change point models, can be used for real-time anomaly detection caused by the false information attack. In this paper, we have evaluated three change point-based statistical models; Expectation Maximization, Cumulative Summation, and Bayesian Online Change Point Algorithms for cyberattack detection in the CV data. Also, data-driven artificial intelligence (AI) models, which can be used to detect known and unknown underlying patterns in the dataset, have the potential of detecting a real-time anomaly in the CV data. We have used six AI models to detect false information attacks and compared the performance for detecting the attacks with our developed change point models. Our study shows that change points models performed better in real-time false information attack detection compared to the performance of the AI models. Change point models having the advantage of no training requirements can be a feasible and computationally efficient alternative to AI models for false information attack detection in connected vehicles.

Recent years have seen a surge in research on deep interpretable neural networks with decision trees as one of the most commonly incorporated tools. There are at least three advantages of using decision trees over logistic regression classification models: they are easy to interpret since they are based on binary decisions, they can make decisions faster, and they provide a hierarchy of classes. However, one of the well-known drawbacks of decision trees, as compared to decision graphs, is that decision trees cannot reuse the decision nodes. Nevertheless, decision graphs were not commonly used in deep learning due to the lack of efficient gradient-based training techniques. In this paper, we fill this gap and provide a general paradigm based on Markov processes, which allows for efficient training of the special type of decision graphs, which we call Self-Organizing Neural Graphs (SONG). We provide an extensive theoretical study of SONG, complemented by experiments conducted on Letter, Connect4, MNIST, CIFAR, and TinyImageNet datasets, showing that our method performs on par or better than existing decision models.

Restaurants are an essential part of a country's economy and society. Whether it may be for social gatherings or a quick bite, most of us have experienced at least one visit. With the recent rise in pop up restaurants and food trucks, it's imperative for the business owner to figure out when and where to open new restaurants since it takes up a lot of time, effort, and capital to do so. This brings up the problem of finding the best optimal time and place to open a new restaurant. TFI which owns many giant restaurant chains has provided demographic, real estate, and commercial data in their restaurant revenue prediction on Kaggle.

Do you understand how your machine learning model works? Despite the ever-increasing usage of machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) techniques, the majority of companies say they can't explain the decisions of their ML algorithms [1]. This is, at least in part, due to the increasing complexity of both the data and models used. It's not easy to find a nice, stable aggregation over 100 decision trees in a random forest to say which features were most important or how the model came to the conclusion it did. This problem grows even more complex in application domains such as computer vision (CV) or natural language processing (NLP), where we no longer have the same high-level, understandable features to help us understand the model's failures.

In this section we will learn - What does Machine Learning mean. What are the meanings or different terms associated with machine learning? You will see some examples so that you understand what machine learning actually is. It also contains steps involved in building a machine learning model, not just linear models, any machine learning model.

Benjamin Franklin said that only two things are certain in life: death and taxes. That explains why my colleagues at STATWORX were less than excited when they told me about their plans for the weekend a few weeks back: doing their income tax declaration. Man, I thought, that sucks, I'd rather spend this time outdoors. And then an idea was born. What could taxes and the outdoors possibly have in common?

In this series, we will start by discussing how to train, visualize, and make predictions with Decision trees. After that, we will go through a training algorithm known as CART which is used by Scikit-learn, and lastly, we would discuss how to regularize the trees and use them for regression tasks. Decision trees are versatile machine learning algorithm capable of performing both regression and classification task and even work in case of tasks which has multiple outputs. They are powerful algorithms, capable of fitting even complex datasets. They are also the fundamental components of Random Forests, which is one of the most powerful machine learning algorithms available today.