This position paper argues that, to its detriment, transparency research overlooks many foundational concepts of artificial intelligence. Here, we focus on uncertainty quantification -- in the context of ante-hoc interpretability and counterfactual explainability -- showing how its adoption could address key challenges in the field. First, we posit that uncertainty and ante-hoc interpretability offer complementary views of the same underlying idea; second, we assert that uncertainty provides a principled unifying framework for counterfactual explainability. Consequently, inherently transparent models can benefit from human-centred explanatory insights -- like counterfactuals -- which are otherwise missing. At a higher level, integrating artificial intelligence fundamentals into transparency research promises to yield more reliable, robust and understandable predictive models.

Gaussian Processes (GPs) are a versatile method that enables different approaches towards learning for dynamics and control. Gaussianity assumptions appear in two dimensions in GPs: The positive semi-definite kernel of the underlying reproducing kernel Hilbert space is used to construct the co-variance of a Gaussian distribution over functions, while measurement noise (i.e. data corruption) is usually modeled as i.i.d. additive Gaussian. In this note, we relax the latter Gaussianity assumption, i.e., we consider kernel ridge regression with additive i.i.d. non-Gaussian measurement noise. To apply the usual kernel trick, we rely on the representation of the uncertainty via polynomial chaos expansions, which are series expansions for random variables of finite variance introduced by Norbert Wiener. We derive and discuss the analytic $\mathcal{L}^2$ solution to the arising Wiener kernel regression. Considering a polynomial system as numerical example, we show that our approach allows to untangle the effects of epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties.

Graph Neural Networks (GNN) provide a powerful framework that elegantly integrates Graph theory with Machine learning for modeling and analysis of networked data. We consider the problem of quantifying the uncertainty in predictions of GNN stemming from modeling errors and measurement uncertainty. We consider aleatoric uncertainty in the form of probabilistic links and noise in feature vector of nodes, while epistemic uncertainty is incorporated via a probability distribution over the model parameters. We propose a unified approach to treat both sources of uncertainty in a Bayesian framework, where Assumed Density Filtering is used to quantify aleatoric uncertainty and Monte Carlo dropout captures uncertainty in model parameters. Finally, the two sources of uncertainty are aggregated to estimate the total uncertainty in predictions of a GNN. Results in the real-world datasets demonstrate that the Bayesian model performs at par with a frequentist model and provides additional information about predictions uncertainty that are sensitive to uncertainties in the data and model.

Due to the steadily increasing relevance of machine learning for practical applications, many of which are coming with safety requirements, the notion of uncertainty has received increasing attention in machine learning research in the last couple of years. In particular, the idea of distinguishing between two important types of uncertainty, often refereed to as aleatoric and epistemic, has recently been studied in the setting of supervised learning. In this paper, we propose to quantify these uncertainties with random forests. More specifically, we show how two general approaches for measuring the learner's aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty in a prediction can be instantiated with decision trees and random forests as learning algorithms in a classification setting. In this regard, we also compare random forests with deep neural networks, which have been used for a similar purpose.