OmniXAI (short for Omni eXplainable AI) is a Python machine-learning library for explainable AI (XAI), offering omni-way explainable AI and interpretable machine learning capabilities to address many pain points in explaining decisions made by machine learning models in practice. OmniXAI includes a rich family of explanation methods integrated in a unified interface, which supports multiple data types (tabular data, images, texts, time-series), multiple types of ML models (traditional ML in Scikit-learn and deep learning models in PyTorch/TensorFlow), and a range of diverse explaination methods including "model-specific" and "model-agnostic" methods (such as feature-attribution explanation, counterfactual explanation, gradient-based explanation, etc). For practitioners, OmniXAI provides an easy-to-use unified interface to generate the explanations for their applications by only writing a few lines of codes, and also a GUI dashboard for visualization for obtaining more insights about decisions. The following table shows the supported explanation methods and features in our library. We will continue improving this library to make it more comprehensive in the future, e.g., supporting more explanation methods for vision, NLP and time-series tasks.
The "black-box" conundrum is one of the biggest roadblocks preventing banks from executing their artificial intelligence (AI) strategies. It's easy to see why: Picture a large bank known for its technology prowess designing a new neural network model that predicts creditworthiness among the underserved community more accurately than any other algorithm in the marketplace. This model processes dozens of variables as inputs, including never-before-used alternative data. The developers are thrilled, senior management is happy that they can expand their services to the underserved market, and business executives believe they now have a competitive differentiator. But there is one pesky problem: The developers who built the model cannot explain how it arrives at the credit outcomes, let alone identify which factors had the biggest influence on them.
Artificial intelligence (AI) systems power the world we live in. Deep neural networks (DNNs) are able to solve tasks in an ever-expanding landscape of scenarios, but our eagerness to apply these powerful models leads us to focus on their performance and deprioritises our ability to understand them. Current research in the field of explainable AI tries to bridge this gap by developing various perturbation or gradient-based explanation techniques. For images, these techniques fail to fully capture and convey the semantic information needed to elucidate why the model makes the predictions it does. In this work, we develop a new form of explanation that is radically different in nature from current explanation methods, such as Grad-CAM.
Machine learning is an integral part of many human-facing computer systems and is increasingly a key component of decisions that have profound effects on people's lives. There are many dangers that come with this. For instance, statistical models can easily be error-prone in regions of the input space that are not well-reflected in training data but that end up arising in practice. Or they can be excessively complicated in ways that impact their generalization ability. Or they might implicitly make their decisions based on criteria that would not considered acceptable by society. For all these reasons, and many others, it is crucial to have models that are understandable or can explain their predictions to humans . Explanations of a classification system can take many forms, but should accurately reflect the classifier's inner workings.
Urban vegetation mapping is critical in many applications, i.e., preserving biodiversity, maintaining ecological balance, and minimizing the urban heat island effect. It is still challenging to extract accurate vegetation covers from aerial imagery using traditional classification approaches, because urban vegetation categories have complex spatial structures and similar spectral properties. Deep neural networks (DNNs) have shown a significant improvement in remote sensing image classification outcomes during the last few years. These methods are promising in this domain, yet unreliable for various reasons, such as the use of irrelevant descriptor features in the building of the models and lack of quality in the labeled image. Explainable AI (XAI) can help us gain insight into these limits and, as a result, adjust the training dataset and model as needed. Thus, in this work, we explain how an explanation model called Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) can be utilized for interpreting the output of the DNN model that is designed for classifying vegetation covers. We want to not only produce high-quality vegetation maps, but also rank the input parameters and select appropriate features for classification. Therefore, we test our method on vegetation mapping from aerial imagery based on spectral and textural features. Texture features can help overcome the limitations of poor spectral resolution in aerial imagery for vegetation mapping. The model was capable of obtaining an overall accuracy (OA) of 94.44% for vegetation cover mapping. The conclusions derived from SHAP plots demonstrate the high contribution of features, such as Hue, Brightness, GLCM_Dissimilarity, GLCM_Homogeneity, and GLCM_Mean to the output of the proposed model for vegetation mapping. Therefore, the study indicates that existing vegetation mapping strategies based only on spectral characteristics are insufficient to appropriately classify vegetation covers.
Not only automation of manufacturing processes but also automation of automation procedures itself become increasingly relevant to automation research. In this context, automated capability assessment, mainly leveraged by deep learning systems driven from 3D CAD data, have been presented. Current assessment systems may be able to assess CAD data with regards to abstract features, e.g. the ability to automatically separate components from bulk goods, or the presence of gripping surfaces. Nevertheless, they suffer from the factor of black box systems, where an assessment can be learned and generated easily, but without any geometrical indicator about the reasons of the system's decision. By utilizing explainable AI (xAI) methods, we attempt to open up the black box. Explainable AI methods have been used in order to assess whether a neural network has successfully learned a given task or to analyze which features of an input might lead to an adversarial attack. These methods aim to derive additional insights into a neural network, by analyzing patterns from a given input and its impact to the network output. Within the NeuroCAD Project, xAI methods are used to identify geometrical features which are associated with a certain abstract feature. Within this work, a sensitivity analysis (SA), the layer-wise relevance propagation (LRP), the Gradient-weighted Class Activation Mapping (Grad-CAM) method as well as the Local Interpretable Model-Agnostic Explanations (LIME) have been implemented in the NeuroCAD environment, allowing not only to assess CAD models but also to identify features which have been relevant for the network decision. In the medium run, this might enable to identify regions of interest supporting product designers to optimize their models with regards to assembly processes.
One of the core envisions of the sixth-generation (6G) wireless networks is to accumulate artificial intelligence (AI) for autonomous controlling of the Internet of Everything (IoE). Particularly, the quality of IoE services delivery must be maintained by analyzing contextual metrics of IoE such as people, data, process, and things. However, the challenges incorporate when the AI model conceives a lake of interpretation and intuition to the network service provider. Therefore, this paper provides an explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) framework for quality-aware IoE service delivery that enables both intelligence and interpretation. First, a problem of quality-aware IoE service delivery is formulated by taking into account network dynamics and contextual metrics of IoE, where the objective is to maximize the channel quality index (CQI) of each IoE service user. Second, a regression problem is devised to solve the formulated problem, where explainable coefficients of the contextual matrices are estimated by Shapley value interpretation. Third, the XAI-enabled quality-aware IoE service delivery algorithm is implemented by employing ensemble-based regression models for ensuring the interpretation of contextual relationships among the matrices to reconfigure network parameters. Finally, the experiment results show that the uplink improvement rate becomes 42.43% and 16.32% for the AdaBoost and Extra Trees, respectively, while the downlink improvement rate reaches up to 28.57% and 14.29%. However, the AdaBoost-based approach cannot maintain the CQI of IoE service users. Therefore, the proposed Extra Trees-based regression model shows significant performance gain for mitigating the trade-off between accuracy and interpretability than other baselines.
When explaining AI behavior to humans, how is the communicated information being comprehended by the human explainee, and does it match what the explanation attempted to communicate? When can we say that an explanation is explaining something? We aim to provide an answer by leveraging theory of mind literature about the folk concepts that humans use to understand behavior. We establish a framework of social attribution by the human explainee, which describes the function of explanations: the concrete information that humans comprehend from them. Specifically, effective explanations should be coherent (communicate information which generalizes to other contrast cases), complete (communicating an explicit contrast case, objective causes, and subjective causes), and interactive (surfacing and resolving contradictions to the generalization property through iterations). We demonstrate that many XAI mechanisms can be mapped to folk concepts of behavior. This allows us to uncover their modes of failure that prevent current methods from explaining effectively, and what is necessary to enable coherent explanations.
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.
Dramatic success in machine learning has created an explosion of new AI capabilities. Continued advances promise to produce autonomous systems that perceive, learn, decide, and act on their own. These systems offer tremendous benefits, but their effectiveness will be limited by the machine's inability to explain its decisions and actions to human users. This issue is especially important for the United States Department of Defense (DoD), which faces challenges that require the development of more intelligent, autonomous, and reliable systems. XAI will be essential for users to understand, appropriately trust, and effectively manage this emerging generation of artificially intelligent partners.