text: By their nature, the composition of black box models is opaque. This makes the ability to generate explanations for the response to stimuli challenging. The importance of explaining black box models has become increasingly important given the prevalence of AI and ML systems and the need to build legal and regulatory frameworks around them. Such explanations can also increase trust in these uncertain systems. In our paper we present RICE, a method for generating explanations of the behaviour of black box models by (1) probing a model to extract model output examples using sensitivity analysis; (2) applying CNPInduce, a method for inductive logic program synthesis, to generate logic programs based on critical input-output pairs; and (3) interpreting the target program as a human-readable explanation. We demonstrate the application of our method by generating explanations of an artificial neural network trained to follow simple traffic rules in a hypothetical self-driving car simulation. We conclude with a discussion on the scalability and usability of our approach and its potential applications to explanation-critical scenarios.
  @cite_9: How can a machine learn from experience? Probabilistic modelling provides a framework for understanding what learning is, and has therefore emerged as one of the principal theoretical and practical approaches for designing machines that learn from data acquired through experience. The probabilistic framework, which describes how to represent and manipulate uncertainty about models and predictions, has a central role in scientific data analysis, machine learning, robotics, cognitive science and artificial intelligence. This Review provides an introduction to this framework, and discusses some of the state-of-the-art advances in the field, namely, probabilistic programming, Bayesian optimization, data compression and automatic model discovery.
  @cite_0: Despite widespread adoption, machine learning models remain mostly black boxes. Understanding the reasons behind predictions is, however, quite important in assessing trust, which is fundamental if one plans to take action based on a prediction, or when choosing whether to deploy a new model. Such understanding also provides insights into the model, which can be used to transform an untrustworthy model or prediction into a trustworthy one. In this work, we propose LIME, a novel explanation technique that explains the predictions of any classifier in an interpretable and faithful manner, by learning an interpretable model locally varound the prediction. We also propose a method to explain models by presenting representative individual predictions and their explanations in a non-redundant way, framing the task as a submodular optimization problem. We demonstrate the flexibility of these methods by explaining different models for text (e.g. random forests) and image classification (e.g. neural networks). We show the utility of explanations via novel experiments, both simulated and with human subjects, on various scenarios that require trust: deciding if one should trust a prediction, choosing between models, improving an untrustworthy classifier, and identifying why a classifier should not be trusted.
  @cite_19: This paper presents the beginnings of an automatic statistician, focusing on regression problems. Our system explores an open-ended space of statistical models to discover a good explanation of a data set, and then produces a detailed report with figures and natural language text. Our approach treats unknown regression functions nonparametrically using Gaussian processes, which has two important consequences. First, Gaussian processes can model functions in terms of high-level properties (e.g. smoothness, trends, periodicity, changepoints). Taken together with the compositional structure of our language of models this allows us to automatically describe functions in simple terms. Second, the use of flexible nonparametric models and a rich language for composing them in an open-ended manner also results in state-of-the-art extrapolation performance evaluated over 13 real time series data sets from various domains.
  @cite_5: Algorithmic systems that employ machine learning play an increasing role in making substantive decisions in modern society, ranging from online personalization to insurance and credit decisions to predictive policing. But their decision-making processes are often opaque -- it is difficult to explain why a certain decision was made. We develop a formal foundation to improve the transparency of such decision-making systems. Specifically, we introduce a family of Quantitative Input Influence (QII) measures that capture the degree of influence of inputs on outputs of systems. These measures provide a foundation for the design of transparency reports that accompany system decisions (e.g., explaining a specific credit decision) and for testing tools useful for internal and external oversight (e.g., to detect algorithmic discrimination). Distinctively, our causal QII measures carefully account for correlated inputs while measuring influence. They support a general class of transparency queries and can, in particular, explain decisions about individuals (e.g., a loan decision) and groups (e.g., disparate impact based on gender). Finally, since single inputs may not always have high influence, the QII measures also quantify the joint influence of a set of inputs (e.g., age and income) on outcomes (e.g. loan decisions) and the marginal influence of individual inputs within such a set (e.g., income). Since a single input may be part of multiple influential sets, the average marginal influence of the input is computed using principled aggregation measures, such as the Shapley value, previously applied to measure influence in voting. Further, since transparency reports could compromise privacy, we explore the transparency-privacy tradeoff and prove that a number of useful transparency reports can be made differentially private with very little addition of noise. Our empirical validation with standard machine learning algorithms demonstrates that QII measures are a useful transparency mechanism when black box access to the learning system is available. In particular, they provide better explanations than standard associative measures for a host of scenarios that we consider. Further, we show that in the situations we consider, QII is efficiently approximable and can be made differentially private while preserving accuracy.
  @cite_11: 
summary: Approaches to generating human-readable explanation models include the Automatic Statistician, a system that discovers plausible models from data and automatically presents its findings as figures and as natural language @cite_9 @cite_19 , LIME (Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations) @cite_0 , a method for isolating parts of a given input that contribute most to a classification, and QII (Quantitative Input Influence) @cite_5 , a technique for calculating influences of individual inputs or groups of inputs, each provides explanations as summaries of local causal phenomena. A recent survey lists various methods in explainable AI, and notes that due to rise in autonomous systems and complex models, there is even more need for interpretable models @cite_11 .