REVIEW 1 cited by
One Explanation Does Not Fit XIL
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
Current machine learning models produce outstanding results in many areas but, at the same time, suffer from shortcut learning and spurious correlations. To address such flaws, the explanatory interactive machine learning (XIL) framework has been proposed to revise a model by employing user feedback on a model's explanation. This work sheds light on the explanations used within this framework. In particular, we investigate simultaneous model revision through multiple explanation methods. To this end, we identified that \textit{one explanation does not fit XIL} and propose considering multiple ones when revising models via XIL.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
PhysAttNet: Enhancing Predictive Performance in Industrial and Astrophysical Time Series via Physics-Informed Attention
A CNN forecaster with attention regularized toward smooth peaks shows small gains on blazar flare forecasting, but its sparsity term is constant under softmax and its claimed broad accuracy gains are unsupported.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.