Exploring the Plausibility of Hate and Counter Speech Detectors with Explainable AI

In this paper we investigate the explainability of transformer models and their plausibility for hate speech and counter speech detection. We compare representatives of four different explainability approaches, i.e., gradient-based, perturbation-based, attention-based, and prototype-based approaches, and analyze them quantitatively with an ablation study and qualitatively in a user study. Results show that perturbation-based explainability performs best, followed by gradient-based and attention-based explainability. Prototypebased experiments did not yield useful results. Overall, we observe that explainability strongly supports the users in better understanding the model predictions.

Trustworthy Visual Analytics in Clinical Gait Analysis: A Case Study for Patients with Cerebral Palsy

Three-dimensional clinical gait analysis is essential for selecting optimal treatment interventions for patients with cerebral palsy (CP), but generates a large amount of time series data. For the automated analysis of these data, machine learning approaches yield promising results. However, due to their black-box nature, such approaches are often mistrusted by clinicians. We propose gaitXplorer, a visual analytics approach for the classification of CP-related gait patterns that integrates Grad-CAM, a well-established explainable artificial intelligence algorithm, for explanations of machine learning classifications. Regions of high relevance for classification are highlighted in the interactive visual interface. The approach is evaluated in a case study with two clinical gait experts. They inspected the explanations for a sample of eight patients using the visual interface and expressed which relevance scores they found trustworthy and which they found suspicious. Overall, the clinicians gave positive feedback on the approach as it allowed them a better understanding of which regions in the data were relevant for the classification.

$k$-Anonymity in Practice: How Generalisation and Suppression Affect Machine Learning Classifiers

The protection of private information is a crucial issue in data-driven research and business contexts. Typically, techniques like anonymisation or (selective) deletion are introduced in order to allow data sharing, \eg\ in the case of collaborative research endeavours. For use with anonymisation techniques, the $k$-anonymity criterion is one of the most popular, with numerous scientific publications on different algorithms and metrics. Anonymisation techniques often require changing the data and thus necessarily affect the results of machine learning models trained on the underlying data. In this work, we conduct a systematic comparison and detailed investigation into the effects of different $k$-anonymisation algorithms on the results of machine learning models. We investigate a set of popular $k$-anonymisation algorithms with different classifiers and evaluate them on different real-world datasets. Our systematic evaluation shows that with an increasingly strong $k$-anonymity constraint, the classification performance generally degrades, but to varying degrees and strongly depending on the dataset and anonymisation method. Furthermore, Mondrian can be considered as the method with the most appealing properties for subsequent classification.