An official website of the United States government
Counterfactual explanations of Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) offer a powerful way to understand data that can naturally be represented by a graph structure. Furthermore, in many domains, it is highly desirable to derive data-driven global explanations or rules that can better explain the high-level properties of the models and data in question. However, evaluating global counterfactual explanations is hard in real-world datasets due to a lack of human-annotated ground truth, which limits their use in areas like molecular sciences. Additionally, the increasing scale of these datasets provides a challenge for random search-based methods. In this paper, we develop a novel global explanation model RLHEX for molecular property prediction. It aligns the counterfactual explanations with humandefined principles, making the explanations more interpretable and easy for experts to evaluate. RLHEX includes a VAE-based graph generator to generate global explanations and an adapter to adjust the latent representation space to human-defined principles. Optimized by Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), the global explanations produced by RLHEX cover 4.12% more input graphs and reduce the distance between the counterfactual explanation set and the input set by 0.47% on average across three molecular datasets. RLHEX provides a flexible framework to incorporate different human-designed principles into the counterfactual explanation generation process, aligning these explanations with domain expertise. The code and data are released at https://github.com/dqwang122/RLHEX.
more »
« less
CLEAR: Generative Counterfactual Explanations on Graphs
Counterfactual explanations promote explainability in machine learning models by answering the question “how should the input instance be altered to obtain a desired predicted label?". The comparison of this instance before and after perturbation can enhance human interpretation. Most existing studies on counterfactual explanations are limited in tabular data or image data. In this paper, we study the problem of counterfactual explanation generation on graphs. A few studies have explored to generate counterfactual explanations on graphs, but many challenges of this problem are still not well-addressed: 1) optimizing in the discrete and disorganized space of graphs; 2) generalizing on unseen graphs; 3) maintaining the causality in the generated counterfactuals without prior knowledge of the causal model. To tackle these challenges, we propose a novel framework CLEAR which aims to generate counterfactual explanations on graphs for graph-level prediction models. Specifically, CLEAR leverages a graph variational autoencoder based mechanism to facilitate its optimization and generalization, and promotes causality by leveraging an auxiliary variable to better identify the causal model. Extensive experiments on both synthetic and real-world graphs validate the superiority of CLEAR over state-of-the-art counterfactual explanation methods on graphs in different aspects.
more »
« less
- PAR ID:
- 10414112
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Advances in neural information processing systems
- Volume:
- 35
- ISSN:
- 1049-5258
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 25895--25907
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Uncovering rationales behind predictions of graph neural networks (GNNs) has received increasing attention over recent years. Instance-level GNN explanation aims to discover critical input elements, such as nodes or edges, that the target GNN relies upon for making predictions. Though various algorithms are proposed, most of them formalize this task by searching the minimal subgraph, which can preserve original predictions. However, an inductive bias is deep-rooted in this framework: Several subgraphs can result in the same or similar outputs as the original graphs. Consequently, they have the danger of providing spurious explanations and failing to provide consistent explanations. Applying them to explain weakly performed GNNs would further amplify these issues. To address this problem, we theoretically examine the predictions of GNNs from the causality perspective. Two typical reasons for spurious explanations are identified: confounding effect of latent variables like distribution shift and causal factors distinct from the original input. Observing that both confounding effects and diverse causal rationales are encoded in internal representations,we propose a new explanation framework with an auxiliary alignment loss, which is theoretically proven to be optimizing a more faithful explanation objective intrinsically. Concretely for this alignment loss, a set of different perspectives are explored: anchor-based alignment, distributional alignment based on Gaussian mixture models, mutual-information-based alignment, and so on. A comprehensive study is conducted both on the effectiveness of this new framework in terms of explanation faithfulness/consistency and on the advantages of these variants. For our codes, please refer to the following URL link:https://github.com/TianxiangZhao/GraphNNExplanationmore » « less
-
Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have been widely deployed in various real-world applications. However, most GNNs are black-box models that lack explanations. One strategy to explain GNNs is through counterfactual explanation, which aims to find minimum perturbations on input graphs that change the GNN predictions. Existing works on GNN counterfactual explanations primarily concentrate on the local-level perspective (i.e., generating counterfactuals for each individual graph), which suffers from information overload and lacks insights into the broader cross-graph relationships. To address such issues, we propose GlobalGCE, a novel global-level graph counterfactual explanation method. GlobalGCE aims to identify a collection of subgraph mapping rules as counterfactual explanations for the target GNN. According to these rules, substituting certain significant subgraphs with their counterfactual subgraphs will change the GNN prediction to the desired class for most graphs (i.e., maximum coverage). Methodologically, we design a significant subgraph generator and a counterfactual subgraph autoencoder in our GlobalGCE, where the subgraphs and the rules can be effectively generated. Extensive experiments demonstrate the superiority of our GlobalGCE compared to existing baselines.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Feature attributions and counterfactual explanations are popular approaches to explain a ML model. The former assigns an importance score to each input feature, while the latter provides input examples with minimal changes to alter the model's predictions. To unify these approaches, we provide an interpretation based on the actual causality framework and present two key results in terms of their use. First, we present a method to generate feature attribution explanations from a set of counterfactual examples. These feature attributions convey how important a feature is to changing the classification outcome of a model, especially on whether a subset of features is necessary and/or sufficient for that change, which attribution-based methods are unable to provide. Second, we show how counterfactual examples can be used to evaluate the goodness of an attribution-based explanation in terms of its necessity and sufficiency. As a result, we highlight the complimentary of these two approaches. Our evaluation on three benchmark datasets --- Adult-Income, LendingClub, and German-Credit --- confirms the complimentary. Feature attribution methods like LIME and SHAP and counterfactual explanation methods like Wachter et al. and DiCE often do not agree on feature importance rankings. In addition, by restricting the features that can be modified for generating counterfactual examples, we find that the top-k features from LIME or SHAP are often neither necessary nor sufficient explanations of a model's prediction. Finally, we present a case study of different explanation methods on a real-world hospital triage problem.more » « less
-
Abstract Recent years have witnessed a rocketing growth of machine learning methods on graph data, especially those powered by effective neural networks. Despite their success in different real‐world scenarios, the majority of these methods on graphs only focus on predictive or descriptive tasks, but lack consideration of causality. Causal inference can reveal the causality inside data, promote human understanding of the learning process and model prediction, and serve as a significant component of artificial intelligence (AI). An important problem in causal inference is causal effect estimation, which aims to estimate the causal effects of a certain treatment (e.g., prescription of medicine) on an outcome (e.g., cure of disease) at an individual level (e.g., each patient) or a population level (e.g., a group of patients). In this paper, we introduce the background of causal effect estimation from observational data, envision the challenges of causal effect estimation with graphs, and then summarize representative approaches of causal effect estimation with graphs in recent years. Furthermore, we provide some insights for future research directions in related area. Link to video abstract:https://youtu.be/BpDPOOqw‐nsmore » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
