We warn against a common but incomplete understanding of empirical research in machine learning (ML) that leads to non-replicable results, makes findings unreliable, and threatens to undermine progress in the field. To overcome this alarming situation, we call for more awareness of the plurality of ways of gaining knowledge experimentally but also of some epistemic limitations. In particular, we argue most current empirical ML research is fashioned as confirmatory research while it should rather be considered exploratory.
This work introduces a novel R package for concise, informative summaries of machine learning models. We take inspiration from the summary function for (generalized) linear models in R, but extend it in several directions: First, our summary function is model-agnostic and provides a unified summary output also for non-parametric machine learning models; Second, the summary output is more extensive and customizable -- it comprises information on the dataset, model performance, model complexity, model's estimated feature importances, feature effects, and fairness metrics; Third, models are evaluated based on resampling strategies for unbiased estimates of model performances, feature importances, etc. Overall, the clear, structured output should help to enhance and expedite the model selection process, making it a helpful tool for practitioners and researchers alike.
While machine learning (ML) models are increasingly used due to their high predictive power, their use in understanding the data-generating process (DGP) is limited. Understanding the DGP requires insights into feature-target associations, which many ML models cannot directly provide, due to their opaque internal mechanisms. Feature importance (FI) methods provide useful insights into the DGP under certain conditions. Since the results of different FI methods have different interpretations, selecting the correct FI method for a concrete use case is crucial and still requires expert knowledge. This paper serves as a comprehensive guide to help understand the different interpretations of FI methods. Through an extensive review of FI methods and providing new proofs regarding their interpretation, we facilitate a thorough understanding of these methods and formulate concrete recommendations for scientific inference. We conclude by discussing options for FI uncertainty estimation and point to directions for future research aiming at full statistical inference from black-box ML models.
Counterfactual explanations elucidate algorithmic decisions by pointing to scenarios that would have led to an alternative, desired outcome. Giving insight into the model's behavior, they hint users towards possible actions and give grounds for contesting decisions. As a crucial factor in achieving these goals, counterfactuals must be plausible, i.e., describing realistic alternative scenarios within the data manifold. This paper leverages a recently developed generative modeling technique -- adversarial random forests (ARFs) -- to efficiently generate plausible counterfactuals in a model-agnostic way. ARFs can serve as a plausibility measure or directly generate counterfactual explanations. Our ARF-based approach surpasses the limitations of existing methods that aim to generate plausible counterfactual explanations: It is easy to train and computationally highly efficient, handles continuous and categorical data naturally, and allows integrating additional desiderata such as sparsity in a straightforward manner.
Global feature effect methods explain a model outputting one plot per feature. The plot shows the average effect of the feature on the output, like the effect of age on the annual income. However, average effects may be misleading when derived from local effects that are heterogeneous, i.e., they significantly deviate from the average. To decrease the heterogeneity, regional effects provide multiple plots per feature, each representing the average effect within a specific subspace. For interpretability, subspaces are defined as hyperrectangles defined by a chain of logical rules, like age's effect on annual income separately for males and females and different levels of professional experience. We introduce Effector, a Python library dedicated to regional feature effects. Effector implements well-established global effect methods, assesses the heterogeneity of each method and, based on that, provides regional effects. Effector automatically detects subspaces where regional effects have reduced heterogeneity. All global and regional effect methods share a common API, facilitating comparisons between them. Moreover, the library's interface is extensible so new methods can be easily added and benchmarked. The library has been thoroughly tested, ships with many tutorials (https://xai-effector.github.io/) and is available under an open-source license at PyPi (https://pypi.org/project/effector/) and Github (https://github.com/givasile/effector).
Survival Analysis provides critical insights for partially incomplete time-to-event data in various domains. It is also an important example of probabilistic machine learning. The probabilistic nature of the predictions can be exploited by using (proper) scoring rules in the model fitting process instead of likelihood-based optimization. Our proposal does so in a generic manner and can be used for a variety of model classes. We establish different parametric and non-parametric sub-frameworks that allow different degrees of flexibility. Incorporated into neural networks, it leads to a computationally efficient and scalable optimization routine, yielding state-of-the-art predictive performance. Finally, we show that using our framework, we can recover various parametric models and demonstrate that optimization works equally well when compared to likelihood-based methods.
Bayesian optimization (BO) with Gaussian processes (GP) has become an indispensable algorithm for black box optimization problems. Not without a dash of irony, BO is often considered a black box itself, lacking ways to provide reasons as to why certain parameters are proposed to be evaluated. This is particularly relevant in human-in-the-loop applications of BO, such as in robotics. We address this issue by proposing ShapleyBO, a framework for interpreting BO's proposals by game-theoretic Shapley values.They quantify each parameter's contribution to BO's acquisition function. Exploiting the linearity of Shapley values, we are further able to identify how strongly each parameter drives BO's exploration and exploitation for additive acquisition functions like the confidence bound. We also show that ShapleyBO can disentangle the contributions to exploration into those that explore aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty. Moreover, our method gives rise to a ShapleyBO-assisted human machine interface (HMI), allowing users to interfere with BO in case proposals do not align with human reasoning. We demonstrate this HMI's benefits for the use case of personalizing wearable robotic devices (assistive back exosuits) by human-in-the-loop BO. Results suggest human-BO teams with access to ShapleyBO can achieve lower regret than teams without.
A major challenge in sample-based inference (SBI) for Bayesian neural networks is the size and structure of the networks' parameter space. Our work shows that successful SBI is possible by embracing the characteristic relationship between weight and function space, uncovering a systematic link between overparameterization and the difficulty of the sampling problem. Through extensive experiments, we establish practical guidelines for sampling and convergence diagnosis. As a result, we present a Bayesian deep ensemble approach as an effective solution with competitive performance and uncertainty quantification.
We argue that interpretations of machine learning (ML) models or the model-building process can bee seen as a form of sensitivity analysis (SA), a general methodology used to explain complex systems in many fields such as environmental modeling, engineering, or economics. We address both researchers and practitioners, calling attention to the benefits of a unified SA-based view of explanations in ML and the necessity to fully credit related work. We bridge the gap between both fields by formally describing how (a) the ML process is a system suitable for SA, (b) how existing ML interpretation methods relate to this perspective, and (c) how other SA techniques could be applied to ML.
Constrained clustering allows the training of classification models using pairwise constraints only, which are weak and relatively easy to mine, while still yielding full-supervision-level model performance. While they perform well even in the absence of the true underlying class labels, constrained clustering models still require large amounts of binary constraint annotations for training. In this paper, we propose a semi-supervised context whereby a large amount of \textit{unconstrained} data is available alongside a smaller set of constraints, and propose \textit{ConstraintMatch} to leverage such unconstrained data. While a great deal of progress has been made in semi-supervised learning using full labels, there are a number of challenges that prevent a naive application of the resulting methods in the constraint-based label setting. Therefore, we reason about and analyze these challenges, specifically 1) proposing a \textit{pseudo-constraining} mechanism to overcome the confirmation bias, a major weakness of pseudo-labeling, 2) developing new methods for pseudo-labeling towards the selection of \textit{informative} unconstrained samples, 3) showing that this also allows the use of pairwise loss functions for the initial and auxiliary losses which facilitates semi-constrained model training. In extensive experiments, we demonstrate the effectiveness of ConstraintMatch over relevant baselines in both the regular clustering and overclustering scenarios on five challenging benchmarks and provide analyses of its several components.