From Anecdotal Evidence to Quantitative Evaluation Methods: A Systematic Review on Evaluating Explainable AI
Nauta, Meike, Trienes, Jan, Pathak, Shreyasi, Nguyen, Elisa, Peters, Michelle, Schmitt, Yasmin, Schlötterer, Jörg, van Keulen, Maurice, Seifert, Christin
–arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
The rising popularity of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) to understand high-performing black boxes, also raised the question of how to evaluate explanations of machine learning (ML) models. While interpretability and explainability are often presented as a subjectively validated binary property, we consider it a multi-faceted concept. We identify 12 conceptual properties, such as Compactness and Correctness, that should be evaluated for comprehensively assessing the quality of an explanation. Our so-called Co-12 properties serve as categorization scheme for systematically reviewing the evaluation practice of more than 300 papers published in the last 7 years at major AI and ML conferences that introduce an XAI method. We find that 1 in 3 papers evaluate exclusively with anecdotal evidence, and 1 in 5 papers evaluate with users. We also contribute to the call for objective, quantifiable evaluation methods by presenting an extensive overview of quantitative XAI evaluation methods. This systematic collection of evaluation methods provides researchers and practitioners with concrete tools to thoroughly validate, benchmark and compare new and existing XAI methods. This also opens up opportunities to include quantitative metrics as optimization criteria during model training in order to optimize for accuracy and interpretability simultaneously.
arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
Jan-20-2022
- Country:
- Oceania > Australia
- North America
- United States
- Maryland > Baltimore (0.04)
- Virginia (0.04)
- Texas > Travis County
- Austin (0.04)
- Michigan > Washtenaw County
- Ann Arbor (0.04)
- Colorado > Denver County
- Denver (0.04)
- Hawaii > Honolulu County
- Honolulu (0.04)
- Louisiana > Orleans Parish
- New Orleans (0.04)
- Pennsylvania > Philadelphia County
- Philadelphia (0.04)
- Utah > Salt Lake County
- Salt Lake City (0.04)
- Georgia > Fulton County
- Atlanta (0.04)
- Washington > King County
- Seattle (0.04)
- Alaska > Anchorage Municipality
- Anchorage (0.04)
- Massachusetts
- Suffolk County > Boston (0.04)
- Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- California
- San Francisco County > San Francisco (0.28)
- San Mateo County > Menlo Park (0.04)
- Los Angeles County
- Long Beach (0.14)
- Los Angeles (0.14)
- New York > New York County
- New York City (0.04)
- Canada
- Quebec > Montreal (0.04)
- Nova Scotia > Halifax Regional Municipality
- Halifax (0.04)
- British Columbia > Metro Vancouver Regional District
- Vancouver (0.04)
- United States
- Europe
- Germany (0.04)
- Netherlands (0.04)
- United Kingdom > England
- Greater London > London (0.04)
- Cambridgeshire > Cambridge (0.04)
- Sweden > Stockholm
- Stockholm (0.04)
- Spain > Catalonia
- Barcelona Province > Barcelona (0.04)
- Italy
- France
- Île-de-France > Paris
- Paris (0.04)
- Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes > Lyon
- Lyon (0.04)
- Île-de-France > Paris
- Asia
- Macao (0.04)
- Singapore (0.04)
- Middle East > Jordan (0.04)
- Taiwan > Taiwan Province
- Taipei (0.04)
- South Korea > Seoul
- Seoul (0.04)
- China > Beijing
- Beijing (0.04)
- Africa > Ethiopia
- Addis Ababa > Addis Ababa (0.04)
- Genre:
- Overview (1.00)
- Research Report
- Experimental Study (0.45)
- New Finding (0.45)
- Industry:
- Health & Medicine (1.00)
- Technology:
- Information Technology
- Data Science > Data Mining (1.00)
- Artificial Intelligence
- Vision (1.00)
- Representation & Reasoning > Expert Systems (1.00)
- Natural Language > Explanation & Argumentation (1.00)
- Issues > Social & Ethical Issues (1.00)
- Cognitive Science (1.00)
- Machine Learning
- Statistical Learning (1.00)
- Neural Networks > Deep Learning (0.93)
- Learning Graphical Models > Directed Networks
- Bayesian Learning (0.67)
- Information Technology