TIP: Typifying the Interpretability of Procedures

We provide a novel notion of what it means to be interpretable, looking past the usual association with human understanding. Our key insight is that interpretability is not an absolute concept and so we define it relative to a target model, which may or may not be a human. We define a framework that allows for comparing interpretable procedures by linking them to important practical aspects such as accuracy and robustness. We characterize many of the current state-of-the-art interpretable methods in our framework portraying its general applicability. Finally, principled interpretable strategies are proposed and empirically evaluated on synthetic data, as well as on the largest public olfaction dataset that was made recently available \cite{olfs}. We also experiment on MNIST with a simple target model and different oracle models of varying complexity. This leads to the insight that the improvement in the target model is not only a function of the oracle model's performance, but also its relative complexity with respect to the target model. Further experiments on CIFAR-10, a real manufacturing dataset and FICO dataset showcase the benefit of our methods over Knowledge Distillation when the target models are simple and the complex model is a neural network.

Confidence Scoring Using Whitebox Meta-models with Linear Classifier Probes

We propose a confidence scoring mechanism for multi-layer neural networks based on a paradigm of a base model and a meta-model. The confidence score is learned by the meta-model using features derived from the base model -- a deep multi-layer neural network -- considered a whitebox. As features, we investigate linear classifier probes inserted between the various layers of the base model and trained using each layer's intermediate activations. Experiments show that this approach outperforms various baselines in a filtering task, i.e., task of rejecting samples with low confidence. Experimental results are presented using CIFAR-10 and CIFAR-100 dataset with and without added noise exploring various aspects of the method.

A Formal Framework to Characterize Interpretability of Procedures

We provide a novel notion of what it means to be interpretable, looking past the usual association with human understanding. Our key insight is that interpretability is not an absolute concept and so we define it relative to a target model, which may or may not be a human. We define a framework that allows for comparing interpretable procedures by linking it to important practical aspects such as accuracy and robustness. We characterize many of the current state-of-the-art interpretable methods in our framework portraying its general applicability.