TY - JOUR
T1 - No silver bullet
T2 - interpretable ML models must be explained
AU - Marques-Silva, Joao
AU - Ignatiev, Alexey
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by the AI Interdisciplinary Institute ANITI, funded by the French program Investing for the Future–PIA3 under Grant agreement no. ANR-19-PI3A-0004, and by the H2020-ICT38 project COALA COgnitive Assisted agile manufacturing for a LAbor force supported by trustworthy Artificial intelligence.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2023 Marques-Silva and Ignatiev.
PY - 2023/4/24
Y1 - 2023/4/24
N2 - Recent years witnessed a number of proposals for the use of the so-called interpretable models in specific application domains. These include high-risk, but also safety-critical domains. In contrast, other works reported some pitfalls of machine learning model interpretability, in part justified by the lack of a rigorous definition of what an interpretable model should represent. This study proposes to relate interpretability with the ability of a model to offer explanations of why a prediction is made given some point in feature space. Under this general goal of offering explanations to predictions, this study reveals additional limitations of interpretable models. Concretely, this study considers application domains where the purpose is to help human decision makers to understand why some prediction was made or why was not some other prediction made, and where irreducible (and so minimal) information is sought. In such domains, this study argues that answers to such why (or why not) questions can exhibit arbitrary redundancy, i.e., the answers can be simplified, as long as these answers are obtained by human inspection of the interpretable ML model representation.
AB - Recent years witnessed a number of proposals for the use of the so-called interpretable models in specific application domains. These include high-risk, but also safety-critical domains. In contrast, other works reported some pitfalls of machine learning model interpretability, in part justified by the lack of a rigorous definition of what an interpretable model should represent. This study proposes to relate interpretability with the ability of a model to offer explanations of why a prediction is made given some point in feature space. Under this general goal of offering explanations to predictions, this study reveals additional limitations of interpretable models. Concretely, this study considers application domains where the purpose is to help human decision makers to understand why some prediction was made or why was not some other prediction made, and where irreducible (and so minimal) information is sought. In such domains, this study argues that answers to such why (or why not) questions can exhibit arbitrary redundancy, i.e., the answers can be simplified, as long as these answers are obtained by human inspection of the interpretable ML model representation.
KW - decision lists
KW - decision sets
KW - decision trees
KW - explainable AI (XAI)
KW - logic-based explainability
KW - model interpretability
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85158129197&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/frai.2023.1128212
DO - 10.3389/frai.2023.1128212
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85158129197
SN - 2624-8212
VL - 6
JO - Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
JF - Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence
M1 - 1128212
ER -