skip to main content

Explore Research Products in the NSF-PAR

Title: Advancements in xASP, an XAI System for Answer Set Programming
Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) aims at addressing complex problems by coupling solutions with reasons that justify the provided answer. In the context of Answer Set Programming (ASP) the user may be interested in linking the presence or absence of an atom in an answer set to the logic rules involved in the inference of the atom. Such explanations can be given in terms of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs). This article reports on the advancements in the development of the XAI system xASP by revising the main foundational notions and by introducing new ASP encodings to compute minimal assumption sets, explanation sequences, and explanation DAGs.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1812628
NSF-PAR ID:
10484184
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Editor(s):
Agostino Dovier, Andrea Formisano
Publisher / Repository:
CEUR-WS.org
Date Published:
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ( , Theory and Practice of Logic Programming)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract The paper describes an ongoing effort in developing a declarative system for supporting operators in the Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) control room. The focus is on two modules: diagnosis and explanation of events that happened in NPPs. We describe an Answer Set Programming (ASP) representation of an NPP, which consists of declarations of state variables, components, their connections, and rules encoding the plant behavior. We then show how the ASP program can be used to explain the series of events that occurred in the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (TMI-2) NPP accident, the most severe accident in the USA nuclear power plant operating history. We also describe an explanation module aimed at addressing answers to questions such as “why an event occurs?” or “what should be done?” given the collected data. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ( , Applied AI Letters)
    Abstract

    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.

     
    more » « less
  3. ; ( , Advances in neural information processing systems)
    Numerous methods have been developed to explain the inner mechanism of deep neural network (DNN) based classifiers. Existing explanation methods are often limited to explaining predictions of a pre-specified class, which answers the question “why is the input classified into this class?” However, such explanations with respect to a single class are inherently insufficient because they do not capture features with class-discriminative power. That is, features that are important for predicting one class may also be important for other classes. To capture features with true class-discriminative power, we should instead ask “why is the input classified into this class, but not others?” To answer this question, we propose a weighted contrastive framework for explaining DNNs. Our framework can easily convert any existing back-propagation explanation methods to build class-contrastive explanations. We theoretically validate our weighted contrast explanation in general back-propagation explanations, and show that our framework enables class-contrastive explanations with significant improvements in both qualitative and quantitative experiments. Based on the results, we point out an important blind spot in the current explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) study, where explanations towards the predicted logits and the probabilities are obfuscated. We suggest that these two aspects should be distinguished explicitly any time explanation methods are applied. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ( , Theory and Practice of Logic Programming)
    Abstract Answer Set Planning refers to the use of Answer Set Programming (ASP) to compute plans , that is, solutions to planning problems, that transform a given state of the world to another state. The development of efficient and scalable answer set solvers has provided a significant boost to the development of ASP-based planning systems. This paper surveys the progress made during the last two and a half decades in the area of answer set planning, from its foundations to its use in challenging planning domains. The survey explores the advantages and disadvantages of answer set planning. It also discusses typical applications of answer set planning and presents a set of challenges for future research. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ( , ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems)
    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
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email