Treatment effect estimation can assist in effective decision-making in e-commerce, medicine, and education. One popular application of this estimation lies in the prediction of the impact of a treatment (e.g., a promotion) on an outcome (e.g., sales) of a particular unit (e.g., an item), known as the individual treatment effect (ITE). In many online applications, the outcome of a unit can be affected by the treatments of other units, as units are often associated, which is referred to as interference. For example, on an online shopping website, sales of an item will be influenced by an advertisement of its co-purchased item. Prior studies have attempted to model interference to estimate the ITE accurately, but they often assume a homogeneous interference, i.e., relationships between units only have a single view. However, in real-world applications, interference may be heterogeneous, with multi-view relationships. For instance, the sale of an item is usually affected by the treatment of its co-purchased and co-viewed items. We hypothesize that ITE estimation will be inaccurate if this heterogeneous interference is not properly modeled. Therefore, we propose a novel approach to model heterogeneous interference by developing a new architecture to aggregate information from diverse neighbors. Our proposed method contains graph neural networks that aggregate same-view information, a mechanism that aggregates information from different views, and attention mechanisms. In our experiments on multiple datasets with heterogeneous interference, the proposed method significantly outperforms existing methods for ITE estimation, confirming the importance of modeling heterogeneous interference.
The aggregation of multiple opinions plays a crucial role in decision-making, such as in hiring and loan review, and in labeling data for supervised learning. Although majority voting and existing opinion aggregation models are effective for simple tasks, they are inappropriate for tasks without objectively true labels in which disagreements may occur. In particular, when voter attributes such as gender or race introduce bias into opinions, the aggregation results may vary depending on the composition of voter attributes. A balanced group of voters is desirable for fair aggregation results but may be difficult to prepare. In this study, we consider methods to achieve fair opinion aggregation based on voter attributes and evaluate the fairness of the aggregated results. To this end, we consider an approach that combines opinion aggregation models such as majority voting and the Dawid and Skene model (D&S model) with fairness options such as sample weighting. To evaluate the fairness of opinion aggregation, probabilistic soft labels are preferred over discrete class labels. First, we address the problem of soft label estimation without considering voter attributes and identify some issues with the D&S model. To address these limitations, we propose a new Soft D&S model with improved accuracy in estimating soft labels. Moreover, we evaluated the fairness of an opinion aggregation model, including Soft D&S, in combination with different fairness options using synthetic and semi-synthetic data. The experimental results suggest that the combination of Soft D&S and data splitting as a fairness option is effective for dense data, whereas weighted majority voting is effective for sparse data. These findings should prove particularly valuable in supporting decision-making by human and machine-learning models with balanced opinion aggregation.
Crowdsourcing has been widely used to efficiently obtain labeled datasets for supervised learning from large numbers of human resources at low cost. However, one of the technical challenges in obtaining high-quality results from crowdsourcing is dealing with the variability and bias caused by the fact that it is humans execute the work, and various studies have addressed this issue to improve the quality by integrating redundantly collected responses. In this study, we focus on the observation bias in crowdsourcing. Variations in the frequency of worker responses and the complexity of tasks occur, which may affect the aggregation results when they are correlated with the quality of the responses. We also propose statistical aggregation methods for crowdsourcing responses that are combined with an observational data bias removal method used in causal inference. Through experiments using both synthetic and real datasets with/without artificially injected spam and colluding workers, we verify that the proposed method improves the aggregation accuracy in the presence of strong observation biases and robustness to both spam and colluding workers.
Crowdsourcing has been used to collect data at scale in numerous fields. Triplet similarity comparison is a type of crowdsourcing task, in which crowd workers are asked the question ``among three given objects, which two are more similar?'', which is relatively easy for humans to answer. However, the comparison can be sometimes based on multiple views, i.e., different independent attributes such as color and shape. Each view may lead to different results for the same three objects. Although an algorithm was proposed in prior work to produce multiview embeddings, it involves at least two problems: (1) the existing algorithm cannot independently predict multiview embeddings for a new sample, and (2) different people may prefer different views. In this study, we propose an end-to-end inductive deep learning framework to solve the multiview representation learning problem. The results show that our proposed method can obtain multiview embeddings of any object, in which each view corresponds to an independent attribute of the object. We collected two datasets from a crowdsourcing platform to experimentally investigate the performance of our proposed approach compared to conventional baseline methods.
Evaluation of intervention in a multi-agent system, e.g., when humans should intervene in autonomous driving systems and when a player should pass to teammates for a good shot, is challenging in various engineering and scientific fields. Estimating the individual treatment effect (ITE) using counterfactual long-term prediction is practical to evaluate such interventions. However, most of the conventional frameworks did not consider the time-varying complex structure of multi-agent relationships and covariate counterfactual prediction. This may sometimes lead to erroneous assessments of ITE and interpretation problems. Here we propose an interpretable, counterfactual recurrent network in multi-agent systems to estimate the effect of the intervention. Our model leverages graph variational recurrent neural networks and theory-based computation with domain knowledge for the ITE estimation framework based on long-term prediction of multi-agent covariates and outcomes, which can confirm under the circumstances under which the intervention is effective. On simulated models of an automated vehicle and biological agents with time-varying confounders, we show that our methods achieved lower estimation errors in counterfactual covariates and the most effective treatment timing than the baselines. Furthermore, using real basketball data, our methods performed realistic counterfactual predictions and evaluated the counterfactual passes in shot scenarios.
Intelligent Tutoring Systems have become critically important in future learning environments. Knowledge Tracing (KT) is a crucial part of that system. It is about inferring the skill mastery of students and predicting their performance to adjust the curriculum accordingly. Deep Learning-based KT models have shown significant predictive performance compared with traditional models. However, it is difficult to extract psychologically meaningful explanations from the tens of thousands of parameters in neural networks, that would relate to cognitive theory. There are several ways to achieve high accuracy in student performance prediction but diagnostic and prognostic reasoning is more critical in learning sciences. Since KT problem has few observable features (problem ID and student's correctness at each practice), we extract meaningful latent features from students' response data by using machine learning and data mining techniques. In this work, we present Interpretable Knowledge Tracing (IKT), a simple model that relies on three meaningful latent features: individual skill mastery, ability profile (learning transfer across skills), and problem difficulty. IKT's prediction of future student performance is made using a Tree-Augmented Naive Bayes Classifier (TAN), therefore its predictions are easier to explain than deep learning-based student models. IKT also shows better student performance prediction than deep learning-based student models without requiring a huge amount of parameters. We conduct ablation studies on each feature to examine their contribution to student performance prediction. Thus, IKT has great potential for providing adaptive and personalized instructions with causal reasoning in real-world educational systems.
Multi-relational graph is a ubiquitous and important data structure, allowing flexible representation of multiple types of interactions and relations between entities. Similar to other graph-structured data, link prediction is one of the most important tasks on multi-relational graphs and is often used for knowledge completion. When related graphs coexist, it is of great benefit to build a larger graph via integrating the smaller ones. The integration requires predicting hidden relational connections between entities belonged to different graphs (inter-domain link prediction). However, this poses a real challenge to existing methods that are exclusively designed for link prediction between entities of the same graph only (intra-domain link prediction). In this study, we propose a new approach to tackle the inter-domain link prediction problem by softly aligning the entity distributions between different domains with optimal transport and maximum mean discrepancy regularizers. Experiments on real-world datasets show that optimal transport regularizer is beneficial and considerably improves the performance of baseline methods.
Understanding the reasons behind the predictions made by deep neural networks is critical for gaining human trust in many important applications, which is reflected in the increasing demand for explainability in AI (XAI) in recent years. Saliency-based feature attribution methods, which highlight important parts of images that contribute to decisions by classifiers, are often used as XAI methods, especially in the field of computer vision. In order to compare various saliency-based XAI methods quantitatively, several approaches for automated evaluation schemes have been proposed; however, there is no guarantee that such automated evaluation metrics correctly evaluate explainability, and a high rating by an automated evaluation scheme does not necessarily mean a high explainability for humans. In this study, instead of the automated evaluation, we propose a new human-based evaluation scheme using crowdsourcing to evaluate XAI methods. Our method is inspired by a human computation game, "Peek-a-boom", and can efficiently compare different XAI methods by exploiting the power of crowds. We evaluate the saliency maps of various XAI methods on two datasets with automated and crowd-based evaluation schemes. Our experiments show that the result of our crowd-based evaluation scheme is different from those of automated evaluation schemes. In addition, we regard the crowd-based evaluation results as ground truths and provide a quantitative performance measure to compare different automated evaluation schemes. We also discuss the impact of crowd workers on the results and show that the varying ability of crowd workers does not significantly impact the results.