An official website of the United States government
Abstract With increasing interest in explaining machine learning (ML) models, this paper synthesizes many topics related to ML explainability. We distinguish explainability from interpretability, local from global explainability, and feature importance versus feature relevance. We demonstrate and visualize different explanation methods, how to interpret them, and provide a complete Python package (scikit-explain) to allow future researchers and model developers to explore these explainability methods. The explainability methods include Shapley additive explanations (SHAP), Shapley additive global explanation (SAGE), and accumulated local effects (ALE). Our focus is primarily on Shapley-based techniques, which serve as a unifying framework for various existing methods to enhance model explainability. For example, SHAP unifies methods like local interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME) and tree interpreter for local explainability, while SAGE unifies the different variations of permutation importance for global explainability. We provide a short tutorial for explaining ML models using three disparate datasets: a convection-allowing model dataset for severe weather prediction, a nowcasting dataset for subfreezing road surface prediction, and satellite-based data for lightning prediction. In addition, we showcase the adverse effects that correlated features can have on the explainability of a model. Finally, we demonstrate the notion of evaluating model impacts of feature groups instead of individual features. Evaluating the feature groups mitigates the impacts of feature correlations and can provide a more holistic understanding of the model. All code, models, and data used in this study are freely available to accelerate the adoption of machine learning explainability in the atmospheric and other environmental sciences.
more »
« less
SHAP-XRT: The Shapley Value Meets Conditional Independence Testing
The complex nature of artificial neural networks raises concerns on their reliability, trustworthiness, and fairness in real-world scenarios. The Shapley value---a solution concept from game theory---is one of the most popular explanation methods for machine learning models. More traditionally, from a statistical perspective, feature importance is defined in terms of conditional independence. So far, these two approaches to interpretability and feature importance have been considered separate and distinct. In this work, we show that Shapley-based explanation methods and conditional independence testing are closely related. We introduce the \textbf{SHAP}ley E\textbf{X}planation \textbf{R}andomization \textbf{T}est (SHAP-XRT), a testing procedure inspired by the Conditional Randomization Test (CRT) for a specific notion of local (i.e., on a sample) conditional independence. With it, we prove that for binary classification problems, the marginal contributions in the Shapley value provide lower and upper bounds to the expected p-values of their respective tests. Furthermore, we show that the Shapley value itself provides an upper bound to the expected p-value of a global (i.e., overall) null hypothesis. As a result, we further our understanding of Shapley-based explanation methods from a novel perspective and characterize the conditions under which one can make statistically valid claims about feature importance via the Shapley value.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2239787
- PAR ID:
- 10518002
- Publisher / Repository:
- TMLR
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Transactions on machine learning research
- ISSN:
- 2835-8856
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Characterization of material structure with X-ray or neutron scattering using e.g. Pair Distribution Function (PDF) analysis most often rely on refining a structure model against an experimental dataset. However, identifying a suitable model is often a bottleneck. Recently, automated approaches have made it possible to test thousands of models for each dataset, but these methods are computationally expensive and analysing the output, i.e. extracting structural information from the resulting fits in a meaningful way, is challenging. OurMachineLearning basedMotifExtractor (ML-MotEx) trains an ML algorithm on thousands of fits, and uses SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanation) values to identify which model features are important for the fit quality. We use the method for 4 different chemical systems, including disordered nanomaterials and clusters. ML-MotEx opens for a type of modelling where each feature in a model is assigned an importance value for the fit quality based on explainable ML.more » « less
-
Explaining machine learning models is an important and increasingly popular area of research interest. The Shapley value from game theory has been proposed as a prime approach to compute feature importance towards model predictions on images, text, tabular data, and recently graph neural networks (GNNs) on graphs. In this work, we revisit the appropriateness of the Shapley value for GNN explanation, where the task is to identify the most important subgraph and constituent nodes for GNN predictions. We claim that the Shapley value is a non-ideal choice for graph data because it is by definition not structure-aware. We propose a Graph Structure-aware eXplanation (GStarX) method to leverage the critical graph structure information to improve the explanation. Specifically, we define a scoring function based on a new structure-aware value from the cooperative game theory proposed by Hamiache and Navarro (HN). When used to score node importance, the HN value utilizes graph structures to attribute cooperation surplus between neighbor nodes, resembling message passing in GNNs, so that node importance scores reflect not only the node feature importance, but also the node structural roles. We demonstrate that GStarX produces qualitatively more intuitive explanations, and quantitatively improves explanation fidelity over strong baselines on chemical graph property prediction and text graph sentiment classification.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
-
SHAP explanations are a popular feature-attribution mechanism for explainable AI. They use game-theoretic notions to measure the influence of individual features on the prediction of a machine learning model. Despite a lot of recent interest from both academia and industry, it is not known whether SHAP explanations of common machine learning models can be computed efficiently. In this paper, we establish the complexity of computing the SHAP explanation in three important settings. First, we consider fully-factorized data distributions, and show that the complexity of computing the SHAP explanation is the same as the complexity of computing the expected value of the model. This fully-factorized setting is often used to simplify the SHAP computation, yet our results show that the computation can be intractable for commonly used models such as logistic regression. Going beyond fully-factorized distributions, we show that computing SHAP explanations is already intractable for a very simple setting: computing SHAP explanations of trivial classifiers over naive Bayes distributions. Finally, we show that even computing SHAP over the empirical distribution is #P-hard.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- The DOI is not currently available.
