REVIEW 1 cited by
Rethinking Explainable Machine Learning as Applied Statistics
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
Rethinking Explainable Machine Learning as Applied Statistics
read the original abstract
In the rapidly growing literature on explanation algorithms, it often remains unclear what precisely these algorithms are for and how they should be used. In this position paper, we argue for a novel and pragmatic perspective: Explainable machine learning needs to recognize its parallels with applied statistics. Concretely, explanations are statistics of high-dimensional functions, and we should think about them analogously to traditional statistical quantities. Among others, this implies that we must think carefully about the matter of interpretation, or how the explanations relate to intuitive questions that humans have about the world. The fact that this is scarcely being discussed in research papers is one of the main drawbacks of the current literature. Moving forward, the analogy between explainable machine learning and applied statistics suggests fruitful ways for how research practices can be improved.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
The Age of AI Agents Demands A New Scientific Paradigm To Sustain Trustworthy Science
AI research agents remove the human accountability backstop that prior science verification relied on, so the paper proposes observable-by-default workflows, tiered verification, and AI attribution standards to preser...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.