Neural network architectures are achieving superhuman performance on an expanding range of tasks. To effectively and safely deploy these systems, their decision‐making must be understandable to a wide range of stakeholders. Methods to explain artificial intelligence (AI) have been proposed to answer this challenge, but a lack of theory impedes the development of systematic abstractions, which are necessary for cumulative knowledge gains. We propose Bayesian Teaching as a framework for unifying explainable AI (XAI) by integrating machine learning and human learning. Bayesian Teaching formalizes explanation as a communication act of an explainer to shift the beliefs of an explainee. This formalization decomposes a wide range of XAI methods into four components: (a) the target inference, (b) the explanation, (c) the explainee model, and (d) the explainer model. The abstraction afforded by Bayesian Teaching to decompose XAI methods elucidates the invariances among them. The decomposition of XAI systems enables modular validation, as each of the first three components listed can be tested semi‐independently. This decomposition also promotes generalization through recombination of components from different XAI systems, which facilitates the generation of novel variants. These new variants need not be evaluated one by one provided that each component has been validated, leading to an exponential decrease in development time. Finally, by making the goal of explanation explicit, Bayesian Teaching helps developers to assess how suitable an XAI system is for its intended real‐world use case. Thus, Bayesian Teaching provides a theoretical framework that encourages systematic, scientific investigation of XAI.
- Award ID(s):
- 1900767
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10344313
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems
- Volume:
- 11
- Issue:
- 3-4
- ISSN:
- 2160-6455
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 45
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
While a vast collection of explainable AI (XAI) algorithms has been developed in recent years, they have been criticized for significant gaps with how humans produce and consume explanations. As a result, current XAI techniques are often found to be hard to use and lack effectiveness. In this work, we attempt to close these gaps by making AI explanations selective ---a fundamental property of human explanations---by selectively presenting a subset of model reasoning based on what aligns with the recipient's preferences. We propose a general framework for generating selective explanations by leveraging human input on a small dataset. This framework opens up a rich design space that accounts for different selectivity goals, types of input, and more. As a showcase, we use a decision-support task to explore selective explanations based on what the decision-maker would consider relevant to the decision task. We conducted two experimental studies to examine three paradigms based on our proposed framework: in Study 1, we ask the participants to provide critique-based or open-ended input to generate selective explanations (self-input). In Study 2, we show the participants selective explanations based on input from a panel of similar users (annotator input). Our experiments demonstrate the promise of selective explanations in reducing over-reliance on AI and improving collaborative decision making and subjective perceptions of the AI system, but also paint a nuanced picture that attributes some of these positive effects to the opportunity to provide one's own input to augment AI explanations. Overall, our work proposes a novel XAI framework inspired by human communication behaviors and demonstrates its potential to encourage future work to make AI explanations more human-compatible.
-
Recent years have witnessed the growing literature in empirical evaluation of explainable AI (XAI) methods. This study contributes to this ongoing conversation by presenting a comparison on the effects of a set of established XAI methods in AI-assisted decision making. Based on our review of previous literature, we highlight three desirable properties that ideal AI explanations should satisfy — improve people’s understanding of the AI model, help people recognize the model uncertainty, and support people’s calibrated trust in the model. Through three randomized controlled experiments, we evaluate whether four types of common model-agnostic explainable AI methods satisfy these properties on two types of AI models of varying levels of complexity, and in two kinds of decision making contexts where people perceive themselves as having different levels of domain expertise. Our results demonstrate that many AI explanations do not satisfy any of the desirable properties when used on decision making tasks that people have little domain expertise in. On decision making tasks that people are more knowledgeable, the feature contribution explanation is shown to satisfy more desiderata of AI explanations, even when the AI model is inherently complex. We conclude by discussing the implications of our study for improving the design of XAI methods to better support human decision making, and for advancing more rigorous empirical evaluation of XAI methods.more » « less
-
Explainable AI (XAI) systems are sociotechnical in nature; thus, they are subject to the sociotechnical gap-divide between the technical affordances and the social needs. However, charting this gap is challenging. In the context of XAI, we argue that charting the gap improves our problem understanding, which can reflexively provide actionable insights to improve explainability. Utilizing two case studies in distinct domains, we empirically derive a framework that facilitates systematic charting of the sociotechnical gap by connecting AI guidelines in the context of XAI and elucidating how to use them to address the gap. We apply the framework to a third case in a new domain, showcasing its affordances. Finally, we discuss conceptual implications of the framework, share practical considerations in its operationalization, and offer guidance on transferring it to new contexts. By making conceptual and practical contributions to understanding the sociotechnical gap in XAI, the framework expands the XAI design space.more » « less
-
Traffic accident anticipation is a vital function of Automated Driving Systems (ADS) in providing a safety-guaranteed driving experience. An accident anticipation model aims to predict accidents promptly and accurately before they occur. Existing Artificial Intelligence (AI) models of accident anticipation lack a human-interpretable explanation of their decision making. Although these models perform well, they remain a black-box to the ADS users who find it to difficult to trust them. To this end, this paper presents a gated recurrent unit (GRU) network that learns spatio-temporal relational features for the early anticipation of traffic accidents from dashcam video data. A post-hoc attention mechanism named Grad-CAM (Gradient-weighted Class Activation Map) is integrated into the network to generate saliency maps as the visual explanation of the accident anticipation decision. An eye tracker captures human eye fixation points for generating human attention maps. The explainability of network-generated saliency maps is evaluated in comparison to human attention maps. Qualitative and quantitative results on a public crash data set confirm that the proposed explainable network can anticipate an accident on average 4.57 s before it occurs, with 94.02% average precision. Various post-hoc attention-based XAI methods are then evaluated and compared. This confirms that the Grad-CAM chosen by this study can generate high-quality, human-interpretable saliency maps (with 1.23 Normalized Scanpath Saliency) for explaining the crash anticipation decision. Importantly, results confirm that the proposed AI model, with a human-inspired design, can outperform humans in accident anticipation.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3387166
