However, the activations of well-fitting KANs tend to exhibit pathologically high-curvature oscillations, making them difficult to interpret, and standard regularization penalties do not prevent this. Here we derive a basis-agnostic curvature penalty and show that penalized models can maintain accuracy while achieving substantially smoother activations. Accounting for how function composition shapes curvature, we prove an upper bound on the full model's curvature relative to the curvature penalty, and use this to motivate richer forms of penalties. Scientific machine learning is increasingly bottlenecked by the trade-off between accuracy and interpretability. Results such as ours that improve interpretability without sacrificing accuracy will further strengthen KANs as a practical tool for both prediction and insight.

The success of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) has led to a need for understanding their decision-making process and providing explanations for their predictions, which has given rise to explainable AI (XAI) that offers transparent explanations for black-box models. Recently, the use of prototypes has successfully improved the explainability of models by learning prototypes to imply training graphs that affect the prediction. However, these approaches tend to provide prototypes with excessive information from the entire graph, leading to the exclusion of key substructures or the inclusion of irrelevant substructures, which can limit both the interpretability and the performance of the model in downstream tasks. In this work, we propose a novel framework of explainable GNNs, called interpretable Prototype-based Graph Information Bottleneck (PGIB), that incorporates prototype learning within the information bottleneck framework to provide prototypes with the key subgraph from the input graph that is important for the model prediction. This is the first work that incorporates prototype learning into the process of identifying the key subgraphs that have a critical impact on the prediction performance. Extensive experiments, including qualitative analysis, demonstrate that PGIB outperforms state-of-the-art methods in terms of both prediction performance and explainability.

In this paper, we critically examine the prevalent practice of using additive mixtures of Matérn kernels in single-output Gaussian process (GP) models and explore the properties of multiplicative mixtures of Matérn kernels for multi-output GP models. For the single-output case, we derive a series of theoretical results showing that the smoothness of a mixture of Matérn kernels is determined by the least smooth component and that a GP with such a kernel is effectively equivalent to the least smooth kernel component. Furthermore, we demonstrate that none of the mixing weights or parameters within individual kernel components are identifiable. We then turn our attention to multi-output GP models and analyze the identifiability of the covariance matrix A in the multiplicative kernel K(x,y) = AK0(x,y), where K0 is a standard single output kernel such as Matérn. We show that A is identifiable up to a multiplicative constant, suggesting that multiplicative mixtures are well suited for multi-output tasks. Our findings are supported by extensive simulations and real applications for both single-and multi-output settings. This work provides insight into kernel selection and interpretation for GP models, emphasizing the importance of choosing appropriate kernel structures for different tasks.

Decision trees are regarded for high interpretability arising from their hierarchical partitioning structure built on simple decision rules. However, in practice, this is not realized because axis-aligned partitioning of realistic data results in deep trees, and because ensemble methods are used to mitigate overfitting. Even then, model complexity and performance remain sensitive to transformation of the input, and extensive expert crafting of features from the raw data is common. We propose the first system to alternate sparse feature learning with differentiable decision tree construction to produce small, interpretable trees with good performance. It benchmarks favorably against conventional tree-based models and demonstrates several notions of interpretability of a model and its predictions.

Deep neural networks (DNNs) are powerful black-box predictors that have achieved impressive performance on a wide variety of tasks. However, their accuracy comes at the cost of intelligibility: it is usually unclear how they make their decisions. This hinders their applicability to high stakes decision-making domains such as healthcare. We propose Neural Additive Models (NAMs) which combine some of the expressivity of DNNs with the inherent intelligibility of generalized additive models. NAMs learn a linear combination of neural networks that each attend to a single input feature.

Topic model evaluation, like evaluation of other unsupervised methods, can be contentious. However, the field has coalesced around automated estimates of topic coherence, which rely on the frequency of word co-occurrences in a reference corpus. Contemporary neural topic models surpass classical ones according to these metrics. At the same time, topic model evaluation suffers from a validation gap: automated coherence, developed for classical models, has not been validated using human experimentation for neural models. In addition, a meta-analysis of topic modeling literature reveals a substantial standardization gap in automated topic modeling benchmarks. To address the validation gap, we compare automated coherence with the two most widely accepted human judgment tasks: topic rating and word intrusion. To address the standardization gap, we systematically evaluate a dominant classical model and two state-of-the-art neural models on two commonly used datasets. Automated evaluations declare a winning model when corresponding human evaluations do not, calling into question the validity of fully automatic evaluations independent of human judgments.