The FIX Benchmark: Extracting Features Interpretable to eXperts

Feature-based methods are commonly used to explain model predictions, but these methods often implicitly assume that interpretable features are readily available. However, this is often not the case for high-dimensional data, and it can be hard even for domain experts to mathematically specify which features are important. Can we instead automatically extract collections or groups of features that are aligned with expert knowledge? To address this gap, we present FIX (Features Interpretable to eXperts), a benchmark for measuring how well a collection of features aligns with expert knowledge. In collaboration with domain experts, we have developed feature interpretability objectives across diverse real-world settings and unified them into a single framework that is the FIX benchmark. We find that popular feature-based explanation methods have poor alignment with expert-specified knowledge, highlighting the need for new methods that can better identify features interpretable to experts.

Sum-of-Parts Models: Faithful Attributions for Groups of Features

An explanation of a machine learning model is considered "faithful" if it accurately reflects the model's decision-making process. However, explanations such as feature attributions for deep learning are not guaranteed to be faithful, and can produce potentially misleading interpretations. In this work, we develop Sum-of-Parts (SOP), a class of models whose predictions come with grouped feature attributions that are faithful-by-construction. This model decomposes a prediction into an interpretable sum of scores, each of which is directly attributable to a sparse group of features. We evaluate SOP on benchmarks with standard interpretability metrics, and in a case study, we use the faithful explanations from SOP to help astrophysicists discover new knowledge about galaxy formation.

Robust field-level inference with dark matter halos

We train graph neural networks on halo catalogues from Gadget N-body simulations to perform field-level likelihood-free inference of cosmological parameters. The catalogues contain $\lesssim$5,000 halos with masses $\gtrsim 10^{10}~h^{-1}M_\odot$ in a periodic volume of $(25~h^{-1}{\rm Mpc})^3$; every halo in the catalogue is characterized by several properties such as position, mass, velocity, concentration, and maximum circular velocity. Our models, built to be permutationally, translationally, and rotationally invariant, do not impose a minimum scale on which to extract information and are able to infer the values of $\Omega_{\rm m}$ and $\sigma_8$ with a mean relative error of $\sim6\%$, when using positions plus velocities and positions plus masses, respectively. More importantly, we find that our models are very robust: they can infer the value of $\Omega_{\rm m}$ and $\sigma_8$ when tested using halo catalogues from thousands of N-body simulations run with five different N-body codes: Abacus, CUBEP$^3$M, Enzo, PKDGrav3, and Ramses. Surprisingly, the model trained to infer $\Omega_{\rm m}$ also works when tested on thousands of state-of-the-art CAMELS hydrodynamic simulations run with four different codes and subgrid physics implementations. Using halo properties such as concentration and maximum circular velocity allow our models to extract more information, at the expense of breaking the robustness of the models. This may happen because the different N-body codes are not converged on the relevant scales corresponding to these parameters.