In this paper, we argue that the way we have been training and evaluating ML models has largely forgotten the fact that they are applied in an organization or societal context as they provide value to people. We show that with this perspective we fundamentally change how we evaluate, select and deploy ML models - and to some extent even what it means to learn. Specifically, we stress that the notion of value plays a central role in learning and evaluating, and different models may require different learning practices and provide different values based on the application context they are applied. We also show that this concretely impacts how we select and embed models into human workflows based on experimental datasets. Nothing of what is presented here is hard: to a large extent is a series of fairly trivial observations with massive practical implications.
Weighted Model Integration (WMI) is a popular formalism aimed at unifying approaches for probabilistic inference in hybrid domains, involving logical and algebraic constraints. Despite a considerable amount of recent work, allowing WMI algorithms to scale with the complexity of the hybrid problem is still a challenge. In this paper we highlight some substantial limitations of existing state-of-the-art solutions, and develop an algorithm that combines SMT-based enumeration, an efficient technique in formal verification, with an effective encoding of the problem structure. This allows our algorithm to avoid generating redundant models, resulting in substantial computational savings. An extensive experimental evaluation on both synthetic and real-world datasets confirms the advantage of the proposed solution over existing alternatives.
Part-prototype Networks (ProtoPNets) are concept-based classifiers designed to achieve the same performance as black-box models without compromising transparency. ProtoPNets compute predictions based on similarity to class-specific part-prototypes learned to recognize parts of training examples, making it easy to faithfully determine what examples are responsible for any target prediction and why. However, like other models, they are prone to picking up confounds and shortcuts from the data, thus suffering from compromised prediction accuracy and limited generalization. We propose ProtoPDebug, an effective concept-level debugger for ProtoPNets in which a human supervisor, guided by the model's explanations, supplies feedback in the form of what part-prototypes must be forgotten or kept, and the model is fine-tuned to align with this supervision. An extensive empirical evaluation on synthetic and real-world data shows that ProtoPDebug outperforms state-of-the-art debuggers for a fraction of the annotation cost.
There is growing interest in concept-based models (CBMs) that combine high-performance and interpretability by acquiring and reasoning with a vocabulary of high-level concepts. A key requirement is that the concepts be interpretable. Existing CBMs tackle this desideratum using a variety of heuristics based on unclear notions of interpretability, and fail to acquire concepts with the intended semantics. We address this by providing a clear definition of interpretability in terms of alignment between the model's representation and an underlying data generation process, and introduce GlanceNets, a new CBM that exploits techniques from disentangled representation learning and open-set recognition to achieve alignment, thus improving the interpretability of the learned concepts. We show that GlanceNets, paired with concept-level supervision, achieve better alignment than state-of-the-art approaches while preventing spurious information from unintendedly leaking into the learned concepts.
Counterfactual interventions are a powerful tool to explain the decisions of a black-box decision process, and to enable algorithmic recourse. They are a sequence of actions that, if performed by a user, can overturn an unfavourable decision made by an automated decision system. However, most of the current methods provide interventions without considering the user's preferences. For example, a user might prefer doing certain actions with respect to others. In this work, we present the first human-in-the-loop approach to perform algorithmic recourse by eliciting user preferences. We introduce a polynomial procedure to ask choice-set questions which maximize the Expected Utility of Selection (EUS), and use it to iteratively refine our cost estimates in a Bayesian setting. We integrate this preference elicitation strategy into a reinforcement learning agent coupled with Monte Carlo Tree Search for efficient exploration, so as to provide personalized interventions achieving algorithmic recourse. An experimental evaluation on synthetic and real-world datasets shows that a handful of queries allows to achieve a substantial reduction in the cost of interventions with respect to user-independent alternatives.
It is increasingly common to solve combinatorial optimisation problems that are partially-specified. We survey the case where the objective function or the relations between variables are not known or are only partially specified. The challenge is to learn them from available data, while taking into account a set of hard constraints that a solution must satisfy, and that solving the optimisation problem (esp. during learning) is computationally very demanding. This paper overviews four seemingly unrelated approaches, that can each be viewed as learning the objective function of a hard combinatorial optimisation problem: 1) surrogate-based optimisation, 2) empirical model learning, 3) decision-focused learning (`predict + optimise'), and 4) structured-output prediction. We formalise each learning paradigm, at first in the ways commonly found in the literature, and then bring the formalisations together in a compatible way using regret. We discuss the differences and interactions between these frameworks, highlight the opportunities for cross-fertilization and survey open directions.
We focus on the development of AIs which live in lifelong symbiosis with a human. The key prerequisite for this task is that the AI understands - at any moment in time - the personal situational context that the human is in. We outline the key challenges that this task brings forth, namely (i) handling the human-like and ego-centric nature of the the user's context, necessary for understanding and providing useful suggestions, (ii) performing lifelong context recognition using machine learning in a way that is robust to change, and (iii) maintaining alignment between the AI's and human's representations of the world through continual bidirectional interaction. In this short paper, we summarize our recent attempts at tackling these challenges, discuss the lessons learned, and highlight directions of future research. The main take-away message is that pursuing this project requires research which lies at the intersection of knowledge representation and machine learning. Neither technology can achieve this goal without the other.
Being able to provide counterfactual interventions - sequences of actions we would have had to take for a desirable outcome to happen - is essential to explain how to change an unfavourable decision by a black-box machine learning model (e.g., being denied a loan request). Existing solutions have mainly focused on generating feasible interventions without providing explanations on their rationale. Moreover, they need to solve a separate optimization problem for each user. In this paper, we take a different approach and learn a program that outputs a sequence of explainable counterfactual actions given a user description and a causal graph. We leverage program synthesis techniques, reinforcement learning coupled with Monte Carlo Tree Search for efficient exploration, and rule learning to extract explanations for each recommended action. An experimental evaluation on synthetic and real-world datasets shows how our approach generates effective interventions by making orders of magnitude fewer queries to the black-box classifier with respect to existing solutions, with the additional benefit of complementing them with interpretable explanations.
We motivate why the science of learning to reject model predictions is central to ML, and why human computation has a lead role in this effort.
We are concerned with debugging concept-based gray-box models (GBMs). These models acquire task-relevant concepts appearing in the inputs and then compute a prediction by aggregating the concept activations. This work stems from the observation that in GBMs both the concepts and the aggregation function can be affected by different bugs, and that correcting these bugs requires different kinds of corrective supervision. To this end, we introduce a simple schema for identifying and prioritizing bugs in both components, discuss possible implementations and open problems. At the same time, we introduce a new loss function for debugging the aggregation step that extends existing approaches to align the model's explanations to GBMs by making them robust to how the concepts change during training.