An official website of the United States government
Abstract Despite the increasingly successful application of neural networks to many problems in the geosciences, their complex and nonlinear structure makes the interpretation of their predictions difficult, which limits model trust and does not allow scientists to gain physical insights about the problem at hand. Many different methods have been introduced in the emerging field of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), which aims at attributing the network’s prediction to specific features in the input domain. XAI methods are usually assessed by using benchmark datasets (such as MNIST or ImageNet for image classification). However, an objective, theoretically derived ground truth for the attribution is lacking for most of these datasets, making the assessment of XAI in many cases subjective. Also, benchmark datasets specifically designed for problems in geosciences are rare. Here, we provide a framework, based on the use of additively separable functions, to generate attribution benchmark datasets for regression problems for which the ground truth of the attribution is known a priori. We generate a large benchmark dataset and train a fully connected network to learn the underlying function that was used for simulation. We then compare estimated heatmaps from different XAI methods to the ground truth in order to identify examples where specific XAI methods perform well or poorly. We believe that attribution benchmarks as the ones introduced herein are of great importance for further application of neural networks in the geosciences, and for more objective assessment and accurate implementation of XAI methods, which will increase model trust and assist in discovering new science.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on January 1, 2026
The influence of correlated features on neural network attribution methods in geoscience
Abstract Artificial neural networks are increasingly used for geophysical modeling to extract complex nonlinear patterns from geospatial data. However, it is difficult to understand how networks make predictions, limiting trust in the model, debugging capacity, and physical insights. EXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) techniques expose how models make predictions, but XAI results may be influenced by correlated features. Geospatial data typically exhibit substantial autocorrelation. With correlated input features, learning methods can produce many networks that achieve very similar performance (e.g., arising from different initializations). Since the networks capture different relationships, their attributions can vary. Correlated features may also cause inaccurate attributions because XAI methods typically evaluate isolated features, whereas networks learn multifeature patterns. Few studies have quantitatively analyzed the influence of correlated features on XAI attributions. We use a benchmark framework of synthetic data with increasingly strong correlation, for which the ground truth attribution is known. For each dataset, we train multiple networks and compare XAI-derived attributions to the ground truth. We show that correlation may dramatically increase the variance of the derived attributions, and investigate the cause of the high variance: is it because different trained networks learn highly different functions or because XAI methods become less faithful in the presence of correlation? Finally, we show XAI applied to superpixels, instead of single grid cells, substantially decreases attribution variance. Our study is the first to quantify the effects of strong correlation on XAI, to investigate the reasons that underlie these effects, and to offer a promising way to address them.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2019758
- PAR ID:
- 10596332
- Publisher / Repository:
- Cambridge University Press
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Environmental Data Science
- Volume:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 2634-4602
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Methods of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) are used in geoscientific applications to gain insights into the decision-making strategy of neural networks (NNs), highlighting which features in the input contribute the most to a NN prediction. Here, we discuss our “lesson learned” that the task of attributing a prediction to the input does not have a single solution. Instead, the attribution results depend greatly on the considered baseline that the XAI method utilizes—a fact that has been overlooked in the geoscientific literature. The baseline is a reference point to which the prediction is compared so that the prediction can be understood. This baseline can be chosen by the user or is set by construction in the method’s algorithm—often without the user being aware of that choice. We highlight that different baselines can lead to different insights for different science questions and, thus, should be chosen accordingly. To illustrate the impact of the baseline, we use a large ensemble of historical and future climate simulations forced with the shared socioeconomic pathway 3-7.0 (SSP3-7.0) scenario and train a fully connected NN to predict the ensemble- and global-mean temperature (i.e., the forced global warming signal) given an annual temperature map from an individual ensemble member. We then use various XAI methods and different baselines to attribute the network predictions to the input. We show that attributions differ substantially when considering different baselines, because they correspond to answering different science questions. We conclude by discussing important implications and considerations about the use of baselines in XAI research. Significance StatementIn recent years, methods of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) have found great application in geoscientific applications, because they can be used to attribute the predictions of neural networks (NNs) to the input and interpret them physically. Here, we highlight that the attributions—and the physical interpretation—depend greatly on the choice of the baseline—a fact that has been overlooked in the geoscientific literature. We illustrate this dependence for a specific climate task, in which a NN is trained to predict the ensemble- and global-mean temperature (i.e., the forced global warming signal) given an annual temperature map from an individual ensemble member. We show that attributions differ substantially when considering different baselines, because they correspond to answering different science questions.more » « less
-
Abstract Complex machine learning architectures and high-dimensional gridded input data are increasingly used to develop high-performance geoscience models, but model complexity obfuscates their decision-making strategies. Understanding the learned patterns is useful for model improvement or scientific investigation, motivating research in eXplainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods. XAI methods often struggle to produce meaningful explanations of correlated features. Gridded geospatial data tends to have extensive autocorrelation so it is difficult to obtain meaningful explanations of geoscience models. A recommendation is to group correlated features and explain those groups. This is becoming common when using XAI to explain tabular data. Here, we demonstrate that XAI algorithms are highly sensitive to the choice of how we group raster elements. We demonstrate that reliance on a single partition scheme yields misleading explanations. We propose comparing explanations from multiple grouping schemes to extract more accurate insights from XAI. We argue that each grouping scheme probes the model in a different way so that each asks a different question of the model. By analyzing where the explanations agree and disagree, we can learn information about the scale of the learned features. FogNet, a complex three-dimensional convolutional neural network for coastal fog prediction, is used as a case study for investigating the influence of feature grouping schemes on XAI. Our results demonstrate that careful consideration of how each grouping scheme probes the model is key to extracting insights and avoiding misleading interpretations.more » « less
-
Abstract Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have recently attracted great attention in geoscience due to their ability to capture non-linear system behavior and extract predictive spatiotemporal patterns. Given their black-box nature however, and the importance of prediction explainability, methods of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) are gaining popularity as a means to explain the CNN decision-making strategy. Here, we establish an intercomparison of some of the most popular XAI methods and investigate their fidelity in explaining CNN decisions for geoscientific applications. Our goal is to raise awareness of the theoretical limitations of these methods and gain insight into the relative strengths and weaknesses to help guide best practices. The considered XAI methods are first applied to an idealized attribution benchmark, where the ground truth of explanation of the network is known a priori , to help objectively assess their performance. Secondly, we apply XAI to a climate-related prediction setting, namely to explain a CNN that is trained to predict the number of atmospheric rivers in daily snapshots of climate simulations. Our results highlight several important issues of XAI methods (e.g., gradient shattering, inability to distinguish the sign of attribution, ignorance to zero input) that have previously been overlooked in our field and, if not considered cautiously, may lead to a distorted picture of the CNN decision-making strategy. We envision that our analysis will motivate further investigation into XAI fidelity and will help towards a cautious implementation of XAI in geoscience, which can lead to further exploitation of CNNs and deep learning for prediction problems.more » « less
-
Unexplainable black-box models create scenarios where anomalies cause deleterious responses, thus creating unacceptable risks. These risks have motivated the field of eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) which improves trust by evaluating local interpretability in black-box neural networks. Unfortunately, the ground truth is unavailable for the model's decision, so evaluation is limited to qualitative assessment. Further, interpretability may lead to inaccurate conclusions about the model or a false sense of trust. We propose to improve XAI from the vantage point of the user's trust by exploring a black-box model's latent feature space. We present an approach, ProtoShotXAI, that uses a Prototypical few-shot network to explore the contrastive manifold between nonlinear features of different classes. A user explores the manifold by perturbing the input features of a query sample and recording the response for a subset of exemplars from any class. Our approach is a locally interpretable XAI model that can be extended to, and demonstrated on, few-shot networks. We compare ProtoShotXAI to the state-of-the-art XAI approaches on MNIST, Omniglot, and ImageNet to demonstrate, both quantitatively and qualitatively, that ProtoShotXAI provides more flexibility for model exploration. Finally, ProtoShotXAI also demonstrates novel explainability and detectability on adversarial samples.more » « less
