Journal
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Volume 116, Issue 44, Pages 22071-22080Publisher
NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1900654116
Keywords
interpretability; machine learning; explainability; relevancy
Categories
Funding
- Army Research Office [W911NF1710005]
- Office of Naval Research [N00014-16-1-2664]
- National Science Foundation (NSF) [DMS-1613002]
- NSF [IIS 1741340]
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Adobe
- Center for Science of Information, a US NSF Science and Technology Center [CCF-0939370]
- U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) [W911NF1710005] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Machine-learning models have demonstrated great success in learning complex patterns that enable them to make predictions about unobserved data. In addition to using models for prediction, the ability to interpret what a model has learned is receiving an increasing amount of attention. However, this increased focus has led to considerable confusion about the notion of interpretability. In particular, it is unclear how the wide array of proposed interpretation methods are related and what common concepts can be used to evaluate them. We aim to address these concerns by defining interpretability in the context of machine learning and introducing the predictive, descriptive, relevant (PDR) framework for discussing interpretations. The PDR framework provides 3 overarching desiderata for evaluation: predictive accuracy, descriptive accuracy, and relevancy, with relevancy judged relative to a human audience. Moreover, to help manage the deluge of interpretation methods, we introduce a categorization of existing techniques into model-based and post hoc categories, with subgroups including sparsity, modularity, and simulatability. To demonstrate how practitioners can use the PDR framework to evaluate and understand interpretations, we provide numerous real-world examples. These examples highlight the often underappreciated role played by human audiences in discussions of interpretability. Finally, based on our framework, we discuss limitations of existing methods and directions for future work. We hope that this work will provide a common vocabulary that will make it easier for both practitioners and researchers to discuss and choose from the full range of interpretation methods.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available