Machine learning models that incorporate concept learning as an intermediate step in their decision making process can match the performance of black-box predictive models while retaining the ability to explain outcomes in human understandable terms. However, we demonstrate that the concept representations learned by these models encode information beyond the pre-defined concepts, and that natural mitigation strategies do not fully work, rendering the interpretation of the downstream prediction misleading. We describe the mechanism underlying the information leakage and suggest recourse for mitigating its effects.
In the predict-then-optimize framework, the objective is to train a predictive model, mapping from environment features to parameters of an optimization problem, which maximizes decision quality when the optimization is subsequently solved. Recent work on decision-focused learning shows that embedding the optimization problem in the training pipeline can improve decision quality and help generalize better to unseen tasks compared to relying on an intermediate loss function for evaluating prediction quality. We study the predict-then-optimize framework in the context of sequential decision problems (formulated as MDPs) that are solved via reinforcement learning. In particular, we are given environment features and a set of trajectories from training MDPs, which we use to train a predictive model that generalizes to unseen test MDPs without trajectories. Two significant computational challenges arise in applying decision-focused learning to MDPs: (i) large state and action spaces make it infeasible for existing techniques to differentiate through MDP problems, and (ii) the high-dimensional policy space, as parameterized by a neural network, makes differentiating through a policy expensive. We resolve the first challenge by sampling provably unbiased derivatives to approximate and differentiate through optimality conditions, and the second challenge by using a low-rank approximation to the high-dimensional sample-based derivatives. We implement both Bellman--based and policy gradient--based decision-focused learning on three different MDP problems with missing parameters, and show that decision-focused learning performs better in generalization to unseen tasks.
Variational inference enables approximate posterior inference of the highly over-parameterized neural networks that are popular in modern machine learning. Unfortunately, such posteriors are known to exhibit various pathological behaviors. We prove that as the number of hidden units in a single-layer Bayesian neural network tends to infinity, the function-space posterior mean under mean-field variational inference actually converges to zero, completely ignoring the data. This is in contrast to the true posterior, which converges to a Gaussian process. Our work provides insight into the over-regularization of the KL divergence in variational inference.
Machine learning models are often trained on data from one distribution and deployed on others. So it becomes important to design models that are robust to distribution shifts. Most of the existing work focuses on optimizing for either adversarial shifts or interventional shifts. Adversarial methods lack expressivity in representing plausible shifts as they consider shifts to joint distributions in the data. Interventional methods allow more expressivity but provide robustness to unbounded shifts, resulting in overly conservative models. In this work, we combine the complementary strengths of the two approaches and propose a new formulation, RISe, for designing robust models against a set of distribution shifts that are at the intersection of adversarial and interventional shifts. We employ the distributionally robust optimization framework to optimize the resulting objective in both supervised and reinforcement learning settings. Extensive experimentation with synthetic and real world datasets from healthcare demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed approach.
In representation learning, there has been recent interest in developing algorithms to disentangle the ground-truth generative factors behind data, and metrics to quantify how fully this occurs. However, these algorithms and metrics often assume that both representations and ground-truth factors are flat, continuous, and factorized, whereas many real-world generative processes involve rich hierarchical structure, mixtures of discrete and continuous variables with dependence between them, and even varying intrinsic dimensionality. In this work, we develop benchmarks, algorithms, and metrics for learning such hierarchical representations.
For machine learning models to be most useful in numerous sociotechnical systems, many have argued that they must be human-interpretable. However, despite increasing interest in interpretability, there remains no firm consensus on how to measure it. This is especially true in representation learning, where interpretability research has focused on "disentanglement" measures only applicable to synthetic datasets and not grounded in human factors. We introduce a task to quantify the human-interpretability of generative model representations, where users interactively modify representations to reconstruct target instances. On synthetic datasets, we find performance on this task much more reliably differentiates entangled and disentangled models than baseline approaches. On a real dataset, we find it differentiates between representation learning methods widely believed but never shown to produce more or less interpretable models. In both cases, we ran small-scale think-aloud studies and large-scale experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk to confirm that our qualitative and quantitative results agreed.
We propose Preferential MoE, a novel human-ML mixture-of-experts model that augments human expertise in decision making with a data-based classifier only when necessary for predictive performance. Our model exhibits an interpretable gating function that provides information on when human rules should be followed or avoided. The gating function is maximized for using human-based rules, and classification errors are minimized. We propose solving a coupled multi-objective problem with convex subproblems. We develop approximate algorithms and study their performance and convergence. Finally, we demonstrate the utility of Preferential MoE on two clinical applications for the treatment of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and management of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD).
Many batch RL health applications first discretize time into fixed intervals. However, this discretization both loses resolution and forces a policy computation at each (potentially fine) interval. In this work, we develop a novel framework to compress continuous trajectories into a few, interpretable decision points --places where the batch data support multiple alternatives. We apply our approach to create recommendations from a cohort of hypotensive patients dataset. Our reduced state space results in faster planning and allows easy inspection by a clinical expert.
The rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) will bring with it an ever-increasing willingness to cede decision-making to machines. But rather than just giving machines the power to make decisions that affect us, we need ways to work cooperatively with AI systems. There is a vital need for research in "AI and Cooperation" that seeks to understand the ways in which systems of AIs and systems of AIs with people can engender cooperative behavior. Trust in AI is also key: trust that is intrinsic and trust that can only be earned over time. Here we use the term "AI" in its broadest sense, as employed by the recent 20-Year Community Roadmap for AI Research (Gil and Selman, 2019), including but certainly not limited to, recent advances in deep learning. With success, cooperation between humans and AIs can build society just as human-human cooperation has. Whether coming from an intrinsic willingness to be helpful, or driven through self-interest, human societies have grown strong and the human species has found success through cooperation. We cooperate "in the small" -- as family units, with neighbors, with co-workers, with strangers -- and "in the large" as a global community that seeks cooperative outcomes around questions of commerce, climate change, and disarmament. Cooperation has evolved in nature also, in cells and among animals. While many cases involving cooperation between humans and AIs will be asymmetric, with the human ultimately in control, AI systems are growing so complex that, even today, it is impossible for the human to fully comprehend their reasoning, recommendations, and actions when functioning simply as passive observers.