Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

General Pitfalls of Model-Agnostic Interpretation Methods for Machine Learning Models

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

arxiv 2007.04131 v2 pith:KQCNWU2X submitted 2020-07-08 stat.ML cs.LG

classification stat.MLcs.LG
keywords interpretationpitfallsmodelmethodsmodelsaddressesfeaturegeneral
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

An increasing number of model-agnostic interpretation techniques for machine learning (ML) models such as partial dependence plots (PDP), permutation feature importance (PFI) and Shapley values provide insightful model interpretations, but can lead to wrong conclusions if applied incorrectly. We highlight many general pitfalls of ML model interpretation, such as using interpretation techniques in the wrong context, interpreting models that do not generalize well, ignoring feature dependencies, interactions, uncertainty estimates and issues in high-dimensional settings, or making unjustified causal interpretations, and illustrate them with examples. We focus on pitfalls for global methods that describe the average model behavior, but many pitfalls also apply to local methods that explain individual predictions. Our paper addresses ML practitioners by raising awareness of pitfalls and identifying solutions for correct model interpretation, but also addresses ML researchers by discussing open issues for further research.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 12 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. Comparative Analysis of Black-Box and White-Box Machine Learning Model in Phishing Detection

    cs.CR 2024-12 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    EBM and XGBoost achieve comparable phishing detection accuracy across 12 datasets, with EBM showing advantages in explanation stability, accuracy, and actionability based on qualitative SHAP analysis.

Pith tools