Statistics without Interpretation: A Sober Look at Explainable Machine Learning

In the rapidly growing literature on explanation algorithms, it often remains unclear what precisely these algorithms are for and how they should be used. We argue that this is because explanation algorithms are often mathematically complex but don't admit a clear interpretation. Unfortunately, complex statistical methods that don't have a clear interpretation are bound to lead to errors in interpretation, a fact that has become increasingly apparent in the literature. In order to move forward, papers on explanation algorithms should make clear how precisely the output of the algorithms should be interpreted. They should also clarify what questions about the function can and cannot be answered given the explanations. Our argument is based on the distinction between statistics and their interpretation. It also relies on parallels between explainable machine learning and applied statistics.

Mind the spikes: Benign overfitting of kernels and neural networks in fixed dimension

The success of over-parameterized neural networks trained to near-zero training error has caused great interest in the phenomenon of benign overfitting, where estimators are statistically consistent even though they interpolate noisy training data. While benign overfitting in fixed dimension has been established for some learning methods, current literature suggests that for regression with typical kernel methods and wide neural networks, benign overfitting requires a high-dimensional setting where the dimension grows with the sample size. In this paper, we show that the smoothness of the estimators, and not the dimension, is the key: benign overfitting is possible if and only if the estimator's derivatives are large enough. We generalize existing inconsistency results to non-interpolating models and more kernels to show that benign overfitting with moderate derivatives is impossible in fixed dimension. Conversely, we show that benign overfitting is possible for regression with a sequence of spiky-smooth kernels with large derivatives. Using neural tangent kernels, we translate our results to wide neural networks. We prove that while infinite-width networks do not overfit benignly with the ReLU activation, this can be fixed by adding small high-frequency fluctuations to the activation function. Our experiments verify that such neural networks, while overfitting, can indeed generalize well even on low-dimensional data sets.

ChatGPT Participates in a Computer Science Exam

We asked ChatGPT to participate in an undergraduate computer science exam on ''Algorithms and Data Structures''. We evaluated the program on the entire exam as posed to the students. We hand-copied its answers onto an exam sheet, which was subsequently graded in a blind setup alongside those of 200 participating students. We find that ChatGPT narrowly passed the exam, obtaining 20.5 out of 40 points. This impressive performance indicates that ChatGPT can indeed succeed in challenging tasks like university exams. At the same time, the tasks in our exam are structurally similar to those on other exams, solved homework problems, and teaching materials that can be found online. Therefore, it would be premature to conclude from this experiment that ChatGPT has any understanding of computer science. The transcript of our conversation with ChatGPT is available at \url{https://github.com/tml-tuebingen/chatgpt-algorithm-exam}, and the entire graded exam is in the appendix of this paper.

AI for Science: An Emerging Agenda

This report documents the programme and the outcomes of Dagstuhl Seminar 22382 "Machine Learning for Science: Bridging Data-Driven and Mechanistic Modelling". Today's scientific challenges are characterised by complexity. Interconnected natural, technological, and human systems are influenced by forces acting across time- and spatial-scales, resulting in complex interactions and emergent behaviours. Understanding these phenomena -- and leveraging scientific advances to deliver innovative solutions to improve society's health, wealth, and well-being -- requires new ways of analysing complex systems. The transformative potential of AI stems from its widespread applicability across disciplines, and will only be achieved through integration across research domains. AI for science is a rendezvous point. It brings together expertise from $\mathrm{AI}$ and application domains; combines modelling knowledge with engineering know-how; and relies on collaboration across disciplines and between humans and machines. Alongside technical advances, the next wave of progress in the field will come from building a community of machine learning researchers, domain experts, citizen scientists, and engineers working together to design and deploy effective AI tools. This report summarises the discussions from the seminar and provides a roadmap to suggest how different communities can collaborate to deliver a new wave of progress in AI and its application for scientific discovery.

Pitfalls of Climate Network Construction: A Statistical Perspective

Network-based analyses of dynamical systems have become increasingly popular in climate science. Here we address network construction from a statistical perspective and highlight the often ignored fact that the calculated correlation values are only empirical estimates. To measure spurious behaviour as deviation from a ground truth network, we simulate time-dependent isotropic random fields on the sphere and apply common network construction techniques. We find several ways in which the uncertainty stemming from the estimation procedure has major impact on network characteristics. When the data has locally coherent correlation structure, spurious link bundle teleconnections and spurious high-degree clusters have to be expected. Anisotropic estimation variance can also induce severe biases into empirical networks. We validate our findings with ERA5 reanalysis data. Moreover we explain why commonly applied resampling procedures are inappropriate for significance evaluation and propose a statistically more meaningful ensemble construction framework. By communicating which difficulties arise in estimation from scarce data and by presenting which design decisions increase robustness, we hope to contribute to more reliable climate network construction in the future.

A Consistent Estimator for Confounding Strength

Regression on observational data can fail to capture a causal relationship in the presence of unobserved confounding. Confounding strength measures this mismatch, but estimating it requires itself additional assumptions. A common assumption is the independence of causal mechanisms, which relies on concentration phenomena in high dimensions. While high dimensions enable the estimation of confounding strength, they also necessitate adapted estimators. In this paper, we derive the asymptotic behavior of the confounding strength estimator by Janzing and Sch\"olkopf (2018) and show that it is generally not consistent. We then use tools from random matrix theory to derive an adapted, consistent estimator.

Relating graph auto-encoders to linear models

Graph auto-encoders are widely used to construct graph representations in Euclidean vector spaces. However, it has already been pointed out empirically that linear models on many tasks can outperform graph auto-encoders. In our work, we prove that the solution space induced by graph auto-encoders is a subset of the solution space of a linear map. This demonstrates that linear embedding models have at least the representational power of graph auto-encoders based on graph convolutional networks. So why are we still using nonlinear graph auto-encoders? One reason could be that actively restricting the linear solution space might introduce an inductive bias that helps improve learning and generalization. While many researchers believe that the nonlinearity of the encoder is the critical ingredient towards this end, we instead identify the node features of the graph as a more powerful inductive bias. We give theoretical insights by introducing a corresponding bias in a linear model and analyzing the change in the solution space. Our experiments show that the linear encoder can outperform the nonlinear encoder when using feature information.

From Shapley Values to Generalized Additive Models and back

In explainable machine learning, local post-hoc explanation algorithms and inherently interpretable models are often seen as competing approaches. In this work, offer a novel perspective on Shapley Values, a prominent post-hoc explanation technique, and show that it is strongly connected with Glassbox-GAMs, a popular class of interpretable models. We introduce $n$-Shapley Values, a natural extension of Shapley Values that explain individual predictions with interaction terms up to order $n$. As $n$ increases, the $n$-Shapley Values converge towards the Shapley-GAM, a uniquely determined decomposition of the original function. From the Shapley-GAM, we can compute Shapley Values of arbitrary order, which gives precise insights into the limitations of these explanations. We then show that Shapley Values recover generalized additive models of order $n$, assuming that we allow for interaction terms up to order $n$ in the explanations. This implies that the original Shapley Values recover Glassbox-GAMs. At the technical end, we show that there is a one-to-one correspondence between different ways to choose the value function and different functional decompositions of the original function. This provides a novel perspective on the question of how to choose the value function. We also present an empirical analysis of the degree of variable interaction that is present in various standard classifiers, and discuss the implications of our results for algorithmic explanations. A python package to compute $n$-Shapley Values and replicate the results in this paper is available at \url{https://github.com/tml-tuebingen/nshap}.

The Manifold Hypothesis for Gradient-Based Explanations

When do gradient-based explanation algorithms provide meaningful explanations? We propose a necessary criterion: their feature attributions need to be aligned with the tangent space of the data manifold. To provide evidence for this hypothesis, we introduce a framework based on variational autoencoders that allows to estimate and generate image manifolds. Through experiments across a range of different datasets -- MNIST, EMNIST, CIFAR10, X-ray pneumonia and Diabetic Retinopathy detection -- we demonstrate that the more a feature attribution is aligned with the tangent space of the data, the more structured and explanatory it tends to be. In particular, the attributions provided by popular post-hoc methods such as Integrated Gradients, SmoothGrad and Input $\times$ Gradient tend to be more strongly aligned with the data manifold than the raw gradient. As a consequence, we suggest that explanation algorithms should actively strive to align their explanations with the data manifold. In part, this can be achieved by adversarial training, which leads to better alignment across all datasets. Some form of adjustment to the model architecture or training algorithm is necessary, since we show that generalization of neural networks alone does not imply the alignment of model gradients with the data manifold.