On the Robustness of Counterfactual Explanations to Adverse Perturbations

Counterfactual explanations (CEs) are a powerful means for understanding how decisions made by algorithms can be changed. Researchers have proposed a number of desiderata that CEs should meet to be practically useful, such as requiring minimal effort to enact, or complying with causal models. We consider a further aspect to improve the usability of CEs: robustness to adverse perturbations, which may naturally happen due to unfortunate circumstances. Since CEs typically prescribe a sparse form of intervention (i.e., only a subset of the features should be changed), we provide two definitions of robustness, which concern, respectively, the features to change and to keep as they are. These definitions are workable in that they can be incorporated as penalty terms in the loss functions that are used for discovering CEs. To experiment with the proposed definitions of robustness, we create and release code where five data sets (commonly used in the field of fair and explainable machine learning) have been enriched with feature-specific annotations that can be used to sample meaningful perturbations. Our experiments show that CEs are often not robust and, if adverse perturbations take place, the intervention they prescribe may require a much larger cost than anticipated, or even become impossible. However, accounting for robustness in the search process, which can be done rather easily, allows discovering robust CEs systematically. Robust CEs are resilient to adverse perturbations: additional intervention to contrast perturbations is much less costly than for non-robust CEs. Our code is available at: https://github.com/marcovirgolin/robust-counterfactuals

Parameterless Gene-pool Optimal Mixing Evolutionary Algorithms

When it comes to solving optimization problems with evolutionary algorithms (EAs) in a reliable and scalable manner, detecting and exploiting linkage information, i.e., dependencies between variables, can be key. In this article, we present the latest version of, and propose substantial enhancements to, the Gene-pool Optimal Mixing Evoutionary Algorithm (GOMEA): an EA explicitly designed to estimate and exploit linkage information. We begin by performing a large-scale search over several GOMEA design choices, to understand what matters most and obtain a generally best-performing version of the algorithm. Next, we introduce a novel version of GOMEA, called CGOMEA, where linkage-based variation is further improved by filtering solution mating based on conditional dependencies. We compare our latest version of GOMEA, the newly introduced CGOMEA, and another contending linkage-aware EA DSMGA-II in an extensive experimental evaluation, involving a benchmark set of 9 black-box problems that can only be solved efficiently if their inherent dependency structure is unveiled and exploited. Finally, in an attempt to make EAs more usable and resilient to parameter choices, we investigate the performance of different automatic population management schemes for GOMEA and CGOMEA, de facto making the EAs parameterless. Our results show that GOMEA and CGOMEA significantly outperform the original GOMEA and DSMGA-II on most problems, setting a new state of the art for the field.

The five Is: Key principles for interpretable and safe conversational AI

In this position paper, we present five key principles, namely interpretability, inherent capability to explain, independent data, interactive learning, and inquisitiveness, for the development of conversational AI that, unlike the currently popular black box approaches, is transparent and accountable. At present, there is a growing concern with the use of black box statistical language models: While displaying impressive average performance, such systems are also prone to occasional spectacular failures, for which there is no clear remedy. In an effort to initiate a discussion on possible alternatives, we outline and exemplify how our five principles enable the development of conversational AI systems that are transparent and thus safer for use. We also present some of the challenges inherent in the implementation of those principles.

Contemporary Symbolic Regression Methods and their Relative Performance

Many promising approaches to symbolic regression have been presented in recent years, yet progress in the field continues to suffer from a lack of uniform, robust, and transparent benchmarking standards. In this paper, we address this shortcoming by introducing an open-source, reproducible benchmarking platform for symbolic regression. We assess 14 symbolic regression methods and 7 machine learning methods on a set of 252 diverse regression problems. Our assessment includes both real-world datasets with no known model form as well as ground-truth benchmark problems, including physics equations and systems of ordinary differential equations. For the real-world datasets, we benchmark the ability of each method to learn models with low error and low complexity relative to state-of-the-art machine learning methods. For the synthetic problems, we assess each method's ability to find exact solutions in the presence of varying levels of noise. Under these controlled experiments, we conclude that the best performing methods for real-world regression combine genetic algorithms with parameter estimation and/or semantic search drivers. When tasked with recovering exact equations in the presence of noise, we find that deep learning and genetic algorithm-based approaches perform similarly. We provide a detailed guide to reproducing this experiment and contributing new methods, and encourage other researchers to collaborate with us on a common and living symbolic regression benchmark.

Model Learning with Personalized Interpretability Estimation (ML-PIE)

High-stakes applications require AI-generated models to be interpretable. Current algorithms for the synthesis of potentially interpretable models rely on objectives or regularization terms that represent interpretability only coarsely (e.g., model size) and are not designed for a specific user. Yet, interpretability is intrinsically subjective. In this paper, we propose an approach for the synthesis of models that are tailored to the user by enabling the user to steer the model synthesis process according to her or his preferences. We use a bi-objective evolutionary algorithm to synthesize models with trade-offs between accuracy and a user-specific notion of interpretability. The latter is estimated by a neural network that is trained concurrently to the evolution using the feedback of the user, which is collected using uncertainty-based active learning. To maximize usability, the user is only asked to tell, given two models at the time, which one is less complex. With experiments on two real-world datasets involving 61 participants, we find that our approach is capable of learning estimations of interpretability that can be very different for different users. Moreover, the users tend to prefer models found using the proposed approach over models found using non-personalized interpretability indices.

Simple Simultaneous Ensemble Learning in Genetic Programming

Learning ensembles by bagging can substantially improve the generalization performance of low-bias high-variance estimators, including those evolved by Genetic Programming (GP). Yet, the best way to learn ensembles in GP remains to be determined. This work attempts to fill the gap between existing GP ensemble learning algorithms, which are often either simple but expensive, or efficient but complex. We propose a new algorithm that is both simple and efficient, named Simple Simultaneous Ensemble Genetic Programming (2SEGP). 2SEGP is obtained by relatively minor modifications to fitness evaluation and selection of a classic GP algorithm, and its only drawback is an (arguably small) increase of the fitness evaluation cost from the classic $\mathcal{O}(n \ell)$ to $\mathcal{O}(n(\ell + \beta))$, with $n$ the number of observations and $\ell$/$\beta$ the estimator/ensemble size. Experimental comparisons on real-world datasets between supervised classification and regression show that, despite its simplicity, 2SEGP fares very well against state-of-the-art (ensemble and not) GP algorithms. We further provide insights into what matters in 2SEGP by (i) scaling $\beta$, (ii) ablating the proposed selection method, (iii) observing the evolvability induced by traditional subtree variation.

Learning a Formula of Interpretability to Learn Interpretable Formulas

Many risk-sensitive applications require Machine Learning (ML) models to be interpretable. Attempts to obtain interpretable models typically rely on tuning, by trial-and-error, hyper-parameters of model complexity that are only loosely related to interpretability. We show that it is instead possible to take a meta-learning approach: an ML model of non-trivial Proxies of Human Interpretability (PHIs) can be learned from human feedback, then this model can be incorporated within an ML training process to directly optimize for interpretability. We show this for evolutionary symbolic regression. We first design and distribute a survey finalized at finding a link between features of mathematical formulas and two established PHIs, simulatability and decomposability. Next, we use the resulting dataset to learn an ML model of interpretability. Lastly, we query this model to estimate the interpretability of evolving solutions within bi-objective genetic programming. We perform experiments on five synthetic and eight real-world symbolic regression problems, comparing to the traditional use of solution size minimization. The results show that the use of our model leads to formulas that are, for a same level of accuracy-interpretability trade-off, either significantly more or equally accurate. Moreover, the formulas are also arguably more interpretable. Given the very positive results, we believe that our approach represents an important stepping stone for the design of next-generation interpretable (evolutionary) ML algorithms.