Explainable AI (XAI) Methods Part 2— Individual Conditional Expectation (ICE) Curves. Tutorial on Individual Conditional Expectation (ICE) Curves, its advantages and disadvantages, how it is different from PDP and how to make….

Explainable Machine Learning (XAI) refers to efforts to make sure that artificial intelligence programs are transparent in their purposes and how they work. This is understandable because a lot of SOTA (State of the Art) models are black boxes which are difficult to interpret or explain despite their top-notch predictive power and performance. For many organizations and corporations, several percentage increase in classification accuracy may not be as important as answers to questions like "how does feature A affect the outcome?" This is why XAI has been receiving more spotlight as it greatly aids decision making and performing causal inference. In the next series of posts, I will cover various XAI methodologies that are in wide use nowadays in the Data Science community.

Despite the myriad peer-reviewed papers demonstrating novel Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based solutions to COVID-19 challenges during the pandemic, few have made significant clinical impact. The impact of artificial intelligence during the COVID-19 pandemic was greatly limited by lack of model transparency. This systematic review examines the use of Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) during the pandemic and how its use could overcome barriers to real-world success. We find that successful use of XAI can improve model performance, instill trust in the end-user, and provide the value needed to affect user decision-making. We introduce the reader to common XAI techniques, their utility, and specific examples of their application. Evaluation of XAI results is also discussed as an important step to maximize the value of AI-based clinical decision support systems. We illustrate the classical, modern, and potential future trends of XAI to elucidate the evolution of novel XAI techniques. Finally, we provide a checklist of suggestions during the experimental design process supported by recent publications. Common challenges during the implementation of AI solutions are also addressed with specific examples of potential solutions. We hope this review may serve as a guide to improve the clinical impact of future AI-based solutions.

In addition to the impressive predictive power of machine learning (ML) models, more recently, explanation methods have emerged that enable an interpretation of complex non-linear learning models such as deep neural networks. Gaining a better understanding is especially important e.g. for safety-critical ML applications or medical diagnostics etc. While such Explainable AI (XAI) techniques have reached significant popularity for classifiers, so far little attention has been devoted to XAI for regression models (XAIR). In this review, we clarify the fundamental conceptual differences of XAI for regression and classification tasks, establish novel theoretical insights and analysis for XAIR, provide demonstrations of XAIR on genuine practical regression problems, and finally discuss the challenges remaining for the field.

As AI systems demonstrate increasingly strong predictive performance, their adoption has grown in numerous domains. However, in high-stakes domains such as criminal justice and healthcare, full automation is often not desirable due to safety, ethical, and legal concerns, yet fully manual approaches can be inaccurate and time consuming. As a result, there is growing interest in the research community to augment human decision making with AI assistance. Besides developing AI technologies for this purpose, the emerging field of human-AI decision making must embrace empirical approaches to form a foundational understanding of how humans interact and work with AI to make decisions. To invite and help structure research efforts towards a science of understanding and improving human-AI decision making, we survey recent literature of empirical human-subject studies on this topic. We summarize the study design choices made in over 100 papers in three important aspects: (1) decision tasks, (2) AI models and AI assistance elements, and (3) evaluation metrics. For each aspect, we summarize current trends, discuss gaps in current practices of the field, and make a list of recommendations for future research. Our survey highlights the need to develop common frameworks to account for the design and research spaces of human-AI decision making, so that researchers can make rigorous choices in study design, and the research community can build on each other's work and produce generalizable scientific knowledge. We also hope this survey will serve as a bridge for HCI and AI communities to work together to mutually shape the empirical science and computational technologies for human-AI decision making.

In addition to the impressive predictive power of machine learning (ML) models, more recently, explanation methods have emerged that enable an interpretation of complex non-linear learning models such as deep neural networks. Gaining a better understanding is especially important e.g. for safety-critical ML applications or medical diagnostics etc. While such Explainable AI (XAI) techniques have reached significant popularity for classifiers, so far little attention has been devoted to XAI for regression models (XAIR). In this review, we clarify the fundamental conceptual differences of XAI for regression and classification tasks, establish novel theoretical insights and analysis for XAIR, provide demonstrations of XAIR on genuine practical regression problems, and finally discuss the challenges remaining for the field.

Recent works have shown explainability and robustness are two crucial ingredients of trustworthy and reliable text classification. However, previous works usually address one of two aspects: i) how to extract accurate rationales for explainability while being beneficial to prediction; ii) how to make the predictive model robust to different types of adversarial attacks. Intuitively, a model that produces helpful explanations should be more robust against adversarial attacks, because we cannot trust the model that outputs explanations but changes its prediction under small perturbations. To this end, we propose a joint classification and rationale extraction model named AT-BMC. It includes two key mechanisms: mixed Adversarial Training (AT) is designed to use various perturbations in discrete and embedding space to improve the model's robustness, and Boundary Match Constraint (BMC) helps to locate rationales more precisely with the guidance of boundary information. Performances on benchmark datasets demonstrate that the proposed AT-BMC outperforms baselines on both classification and rationale extraction by a large margin. Robustness analysis shows that the proposed AT-BMC decreases the attack success rate effectively by up to 69%. The empirical results indicate that there are connections between robust models and better explanations.

Language-enabled AI systems can answer complex, multi-hop questions to high accuracy, but supporting answers with evidence is a more challenging task which is important for the transparency and trustworthiness to users. Prior work in this area typically makes a trade-off between efficiency and accuracy; state-of-the-art deep neural network systems are too cumbersome to be useful in large-scale applications, while the fastest systems lack reliability. In this work, we integrate fast syntactic methods with powerful semantic methods for multi-hop explanation generation based on declarative facts. Our best system, which learns a lightweight operation to simulate multi-hop reasoning over pieces of evidence and fine-tunes language models to re-rank generated explanation chains, outperforms a purely syntactic baseline from prior work by up to 7% in gold explanation retrieval rate.

Artificial intelligence (AI) enables machines to learn from human experience, adjust to new inputs, and perform human-like tasks. AI is progressing rapidly and is transforming the way businesses operate, from process automation to cognitive augmentation of tasks and intelligent process/data analytics. However, the main challenge for human users would be to understand and appropriately trust the result of AI algorithms and methods. In this paper, to address this challenge, we study and analyze the recent work done in Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods and tools. We introduce a novel XAI process, which facilitates producing explainable models while maintaining a high level of learning performance. We present an interactive evidence-based approach to assist human users in comprehending and trusting the results and output created by AI-enabled algorithms. We adopt a typical scenario in the Banking domain for analyzing customer transactions. We develop a digital dashboard to facilitate interacting with the algorithm results and discuss how the proposed XAI method can significantly improve the confidence of data scientists in understanding the result of AI-enabled algorithms.

People have become very familiar with the term artificial intelligence (AI), but many of its users have only a rudimentary understanding of how it actually works. As a result, to date financial services and many other industries have yet to leverage its full capabilities. For financial services firms, adoption of explainable AI could drive adoption of AI-related technologies from the current rate of 30% to as high as 50% in the next 18 months, according to Gartner analyst and vice president Moutusi Sau, adding that lack of explainability is inhibiting financial services providers from adopting/rolling out pilots and projects in lending and from offering more products to the "underbanked" -- those who don't seek banking products or services, many because they don't think they will qualify. Moving to "explainable AI" will remove much of the mystery around AI, and, as a result will drive adoption of more AI-driven services experts agree. The Global Explainable AI (XAI) market size is estimated to grow from $3.50 billion in 2020 to $21.03 billion by 2030, according to ResearchandMarkets.