Abstract
AbstractMachine learning (ML) applications have automated numerous real-life tasks, improving both private and public life. However, the black-box nature of many state-of-the-art models poses the challenge of model verification; how can one be sure that the algorithm bases its decisions on the proper criteria, or that it does not discriminate against certain minority groups? In this paper we propose a way to generate diverse counterfactual explanations from multilinear models, a broad class which includes Random Forests, as well as Bayesian Networks.
Funder
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference46 articles.
1. Belle, V., & Papantonis, I. (2020). Principles and practice of explainable machine learning. CoRR,abs/2009.11698.
2. Binns, R., Van Kleek, M., Veale, M., Lyngs, U., Zhao, J., & Shadbolt, N. (2018). ’It’s reducing a human being to a percentage’: Perceptions of justice in algorithmic decisions. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI’18, Association for Computing Machinery, (pp. 1–14), New York, NY, USA.
3. Bishop, C. M. (2006). Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Information Science and Statistics). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
4. Boutilier, C., Friedman, N., Goldszmidt, M., & Koller, D. (1996). Context-specific independence in Bayesian networks. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, UAI’96, (pp. 115–123), San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
5. Breiman, L. (1996). Bagging predictors. Machine Learning, 24(2), 123–140.