REVIEW 2 cited by
Impact of Accuracy on Model Interpretations
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Model interpretations are often used in practice to extract real world insights from machine learning models. These interpretations have a wide range of applications; they can be presented as business recommendations or used to evaluate model bias. It is vital for a data scientist to choose trustworthy interpretations to drive real world impact. Doing so requires an understanding of how the accuracy of a model impacts the quality of standard interpretation tools. In this paper, we will explore how a model's predictive accuracy affects interpretation quality. We propose two metrics to quantify the quality of an interpretation and design an experiment to test how these metrics vary with model accuracy. We find that for datasets that can be modeled accurately by a variety of methods, simpler methods yield higher quality interpretations. We also identify which interpretation method works the best for lower levels of model accuracy.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
BanClickThumb: A Multimodal Dataset and Transformer Fusion Benchmarks for Clickbait Detection in Bengali YouTube Videos
First public multimodal Bengali clickbait dataset (7,147 pairs) plus a 27-configuration fusion benchmark; ViT+XLM-RoBERTa intermediate fusion tops out at 0.84 accuracy.
-
Are machine learning interpretations reliable? A stability study on global interpretations
Popular machine learning interpretation methods are frequently unstable under small data perturbations, and interpretation stability does not track prediction accuracy.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.