REVIEW 2 cited by
Contrastive Explanations for Model Interpretability
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
Contrastive explanations clarify why an event occurred in contrast to another. They are more inherently intuitive to humans to both produce and comprehend. We propose a methodology to produce contrastive explanations for classification models by modifying the representation to disregard non-contrastive information, and modifying model behavior to only be based on contrastive reasoning. Our method is based on projecting model representation to a latent space that captures only the features that are useful (to the model) to differentiate two potential decisions. We demonstrate the value of contrastive explanations by analyzing two different scenarios, using both high-level abstract concept attribution and low-level input token/span attribution, on two widely used text classification tasks. Specifically, we produce explanations for answering: for which label, and against which alternative label, is some aspect of the input useful? And which aspects of the input are useful for and against particular decisions? Overall, our findings shed light on the ability of label-contrastive explanations to provide a more accurate and finer-grained interpretability of a model's decision.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Morae: Proactively Pausing UI Agents for User Choices
Morae, a UI agent that proactively pauses at ambiguous decision points, helps blind and low-vision users complete more tasks and express preferences better than fully autonomous agents.
-
Can human clinical rationales improve the performance and explainability of clinical text classification models?
Adding 96,679 human rationale highlights improves cancer-site classification less than adding the same number of full pathology reports, and the explainability gain is small.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.