Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

The Doctor Just Won't Accept That!

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 1711.08037 v2 pith:YX55YGVA submitted 2017-11-20 stat.ML

classification stat.ML
keywords acceptlearningmachinestakeholderswhatfieldinterpretablejust
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Calls to arms to build interpretable models express a well-founded discomfort with machine learning. Should a software agent that does not even know what a loan is decide who qualifies for one? Indeed, we ought to be cautious about injecting machine learning (or anything else, for that matter) into applications where there may be a significant risk of causing social harm. However, claims that stakeholders "just won't accept that!" do not provide a sufficient foundation for a proposed field of study. For the field of interpretable machine learning to advance, we must ask the following questions: What precisely won't various stakeholders accept? What do they want? Are these desiderata reasonable? Are they feasible? In order to answer these questions, we'll have to give real-world problems and their respective stakeholders greater consideration.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Pragmatic Policy Development via Interpretable Behavior Cloning

    cs.LG 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A decision-tree behavior cloning approach that chooses the most frequent treatments per patient state yields interpretable policies with reliable off-policy evaluation in two clinical datasets.

  2. Unexplainability and Incomprehensibility of Artificial Intelligence

    cs.CY 2019-06 unverdicted novelty 3.0 of 10

    Advanced AI systems are unexplainable in full and produce explanations that humans cannot comprehend.

Pith tools