REVIEW 1 cited by
Human-interpretable model explainability on high-dimensional data
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
The importance of explainability in machine learning continues to grow, as both neural-network architectures and the data they model become increasingly complex. Unique challenges arise when a model's input features become high dimensional: on one hand, principled model-agnostic approaches to explainability become too computationally expensive; on the other, more efficient explainability algorithms lack natural interpretations for general users. In this work, we introduce a framework for human-interpretable explainability on high-dimensional data, consisting of two modules. First, we apply a semantically meaningful latent representation, both to reduce the raw dimensionality of the data, and to ensure its human interpretability. These latent features can be learnt, e.g. explicitly as disentangled representations or implicitly through image-to-image translation, or they can be based on any computable quantities the user chooses. Second, we adapt the Shapley paradigm for model-agnostic explainability to operate on these latent features. This leads to interpretable model explanations that are both theoretically controlled and computationally tractable. We benchmark our approach on synthetic data and demonstrate its effectiveness on several image-classification tasks.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Strategies and Challenges of Efficient White-Box Training for Human Activity Recognition
A position paper proposing white-box training with latent space visualization, human-in-the-loop feedback, and LLM assistance for human activity recognition, with no experimental validation.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.