1 Affiliation : Faculty of Computers and Informatics, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Sharqiyah, 44519, Egypt
Email : aabdelmounem@zu.edu.eg
2 Affiliation : Faculty of Computers and Informatics, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Sharqiyah, 44519, Egypt
Email : nihal.nabil@fci.zu.edu.eg
Abstract :
Explainable artificial intelligence received great research attention in the past few years during the widespread of Black-Box techniques in sensitive fields such as medical care, self-driving cars, etc. Artificial intelligence needs explainable methods to discover model biases. Explainable artificial intelligence will lead to obtaining fairness and Transparency in the model. Making artificial intelligence models explainable and interpretable is challenging when implementing black-box models. Because of the inherent limitations of collecting data in its raw form, data fusion has become a popular method for dealing with such data and acquiring more trustworthy, helpful, and precise insights. Compared to other, more traditional-based data fusion methods, machine learning's capacity to automatically learn from experience with nonexplicit programming significantly improves fusion's computational and predictive power. This paper comprehensively studies the most explainable artificial intelligent methods based on anomaly detection. We proposed the required criteria of the transparency model to measure the data fusion analytics techniques. Also, define the different used evaluation metrics in explainable artificial intelligence. We provide some applications for explainable artificial intelligence. We provide a case study of anomaly detection with the fusion of machine learning. Finally, we discuss the key challenges and future directions in explainable artificial intelligence.
Keywords :
artificial intelligence; Black-Box; machine learning; explainable artificial intelligence; Information fusion; intelligent methods; data fusion; anomaly detection;
References :
[1] X. Liu, L. Xie, Y. Wang, J. Zou, J. Xiong, Z. Ying, et al., "Privacy and Security Issues in Deep Learning: A
Survey," IEEE Access, 2020.
[2] I. Northpointe, "Practitioner's Guide to COMPAS Core," 2015.
[3] M. MCGOUGH, "How bad is Sacramento's air, exactly? Google results appear at odds with reality, some say," in
Sacramento BEE, ed, 2018.
[4] W. Samek and K.-R. Müller, "Towards explainable artificial intelligence," in Explainable AI: interpreting,
explaining and visualizing deep learning, ed: Springer, 2019, pp. 5-22.
[5] F. Bodria, F. Giannotti, R. Guidotti, F. Naretto, D. Pedreschi, and S. Rinzivillo, "Benchmarking and survey of
explanation methods for black-box models," arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.13076, 2021.
[6] P. Linardatos, V. Papastefanopoulos, and S. Kotsiantis, "Explainable AI: A Review of Machine Learning
Interpretability Methods," Entropy, vol. 23, p. 18, 2021.
[7] S. Lapuschkin, S. Wäldchen, A. Binder, G. Montavon, W. Samek, and K.-R. Müller, "Unmasking clever Hans
predictors and assessing what machines really learn," Nature communications, vol. 10, pp. 1-8, 2019.
[8] I. Goodfellow, Y. Bengio, A. Courville, and Y. Bengio, Deep learning vol. 1: MIT Press Cambridge, 2016.
[9] C. Molnar, Interpretable machine learning: Lulu. com, 2020.
[10] M. T. Ribeiro, S. Singh, and C. Guestrin, "Why should i trust you?" Explaining the predictions of any classifier,"
in Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining,
2016, pp. 1135-1144.
[11] M. T. Ribeiro, S. Singh, and C. Guestrin, "Anchors: High-precision model-agnostic explanations," in Proceedings
of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2018.
[12] S. Lundberg and S.-I. Lee, "A unified approach to interpreting model predictions," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1705.07874, 2017.
[13] A. Goldstein, A. Kapelner, J. Bleich, and E. Pitkin, "Peeking inside the black box: Visualizing statistical learning
with plots of individual conditional expectation," Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, vol. 24, pp.
44-65, 2015.
[14] D. W. Apley and J. Zhu, "Visualizing the effects of predictor variables in black box supervised learning models,"
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), vol. 82, pp. 1059-1086, 2020.
[15] L. Breiman, "Random forests," Machine learning, vol. 45, pp. 5-32, 2001.
[16] M. Sato and H. Tsukimoto, "Rule extraction from neural networks via decision tree induction," in IJCNN'01.
International Joint Conference on Neural Networks. Proceedings (Cat. No. 01CH37222), 2001, pp. 1870-1875.
[17] M. Craven and J. Shavlik, "Extracting Tree-Structured Representations of Trained Networks, Advances, Neural
Information Processing Systems 8," 1996.
[18] P. Biecek and T. Burzykowski, Explanatory model analysis: explore, explain, and examine predictive models:
CRC Press, 2021.
[19] R. Agarwal, N. Frosst, X. Zhang, R. Caruana, and G. E. Hinton, "Neural additive models: Interpretable machine
learning with neural nets," arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.13912, 2020.
[20] S. Anjomshoae, T. Kampik, and K. Främling, "Py-CIU: A Python Library for Explaining Machine Learning
Predictions Using Contextual Importance and Utility," in IJCAI-PRICAI 2020 Workshop on Explainable Artificial
Intelligence (XAI), 2020.
[21] S. Tan, M. Soloviev, G. Hooker, and M. T. Wells, "Tree space prototypes: Another look at making tree ensembles
interpretable," in Proceedings of the 2020 ACM-IMS on Foundations of Data Science Conference, 2020, pp. 23-
34.
[22] R. Luss, P.-Y. Chen, A. Dhurandhar, P. Sattigeri, Y. Zhang, K. Shanmugam, et al., "Generating contrastive
explanations with monotonic attribute functions," arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.12698, 2019.
[23] M. R. Zafar and N. M. Khan, "DLIME: a deterministic local interpretable model-agnostic explanations approach
for computer-aided diagnosis systems," arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.10263, 2019.
[24] R. K. Mothilal, A. Sharma, and C. Tan, "Explaining machine learning classifiers through diverse counterfactual
explanations," in Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 2020, pp.
607-617.
[25] E. Albini, A. Rago, P. Baroni, and F. Toni, "Relation-based counterfactual explanations for Bayesian network
classifiers," in Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI
(2020, To Appear), 2020.
[26] R. Poyiadzi, K. Sokol, R. Santos-Rodriguez, T. De Bie, and P. Flach, "FACE: feasible and actionable
counterfactual explanations," in Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 2020, pp.
344-350.
[27] B. Kim, O. Koyejo, and R. Khanna, "Examples are not enough, learn to criticize! Criticism for Interpretability," in
NIPS, 2016, pp. 2280-2288.
[28] K. Simonyan, A. Vedaldi, and A. Zisserman, "Deep inside convolutional networks: Visualising image
classification models and saliency maps," arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.6034, 2013.
[29] M. D. Zeiler and R. Fergus, "Visualizing and understanding convolutional networks," in European conference on
computer vision, 2014, pp. 818-833.
[30] S. Bach, A. Binder, G. Montavon, F. Klauschen, K.-R. Müller, and W. Samek, "On pixel-wise explanations for
non-linear classifier decisions by layer-wise relevance propagation," PloS one, vol. 10, p. e0130140, 2015.
[31] T. Lei, R. Barzilay, and T. Jaakkola, "Rationalizing neural predictions," arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.04155, 2016.
[32] A. Chattopadhay, A. Sarkar, P. Howlader, and V. N. Balasubramanian, "Grad-cam++: Generalized gradient-based
visual explanations for deep convolutional networks," in 2018 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of
Computer Vision (WACV), 2018, pp. 839-847.
[33] X. Wang, D. Wang, C. Xu, X. He, Y. Cao, and T.-S. Chua, "Explainable reasoning over knowledge graphs for
recommendation," in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2019, pp. 5329-5336.
[34] W. Ma, M. Zhang, Y. Cao, W. Jin, C. Wang, Y. Liu, et al., "Jointly learning explainable rules for recommendation
with knowledge graph," in The World Wide Web Conference, 2019, pp. 1210-1221.
[35] H. Yang, C. Rudin, and M. Seltzer, "Scalable Bayesian rule lists," in International Conference on Machine
Learning, 2017, pp. 3921-3930.
[36] B. Ustun and C. Rudin, "Supersparse linear integer models for optimized medical scoring systems," Machine
Learning, vol. 102, pp. 349-391, 2016.
[37] M. Hind, D. Wei, M. Campbell, N. C. Codella, A. Dhurandhar, A. Mojsilović, et al., "TED: Teaching AI to
explain its decisions," in Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 2019, pp.
123-129.
[38] J. Wu, B. Zhou, D. Peck, S. Hsieh, V. Dialani, L. Mackey, et al., "Deepminer: Discovering interpretable
representations for mammogram classification and explanation," arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.12323, 2018.
[39] A. J. Barnett, F. R. Schwartz, C. Tao, C. Chen, Y. Ren, J. Y. Lo, et al., "IAIA-BL: A Case-based Interpretable
Deep Learning Model for Classification of Mass Lesions in Digital Mammography," arXiv preprint
arXiv:2103.12308, 2021.
[40] A. Fisher, C. Rudin, and F. Dominici, "All Models are Wrong, but Many are Useful: Learning a Variable's
Importance by Studying an Entire Class of Prediction Models Simultaneously," Journal of Machine Learning
Research, vol. 20, pp. 1-81, 2019.
[41] M. Robnik-Šikonja and I. Kononenko, "Explaining classifications for individual instances," IEEE Transactions on
Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 20, pp. 589-600, 2008.
[42] S. Wachter, B. Mittelstadt, and C. Russell, "Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box:
Automated decisions and the GDPR," Harv. JL & Tech., vol. 31, p. 841, 2017.
[43] M. Du, N. Liu, F. Yang, S. Ji, and X. Hu, "On the attribution of recurrent neural network predictions via additive
decomposition," in The World Wide Web Conference, 2019, pp. 383-393.
[44] D. Alvarez-Melis and T. S. Jaakkola, "On the robustness of interpretability methods," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1806.08049, 2018.
[45] P.-J. Kindermans, S. Hooker, J. Adebayo, M. Alber, K. T. Schütt, S. Dähne, et al., "The (un) reliability of saliency
methods," in Explainable AI: Interpreting, Explaining and Visualizing Deep Learning, ed: Springer, 2019, pp.
267-280.
[46] F. Kamiran and T. Calders, "Data preprocessing techniques for classification without discrimination," Knowledge
and Information Systems, vol. 33, pp. 1-33, 2012.
[47] B. H. Zhang, B. Lemoine, and M. Mitchell, "Mitigating unwanted biases with adversarial learning," in
Proceedings of the 2018 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 2018, pp. 335-340.
[48] M. Hardt, E. Price, and N. Srebro, "Equality of opportunity in supervised learning," arXiv preprint
arXiv:1610.02413, 2016.
[49] J. Kauffmann, L. Ruff, G. Montavon, and K.-R. Müller, "The Clever Hans effect in anomaly detection," arXiv
preprint arXiv:2006.10609, 2020.
| Style | # |
|---|---|
| MLA | Ahmed Abdelmonem,Nehal N. Mostafa. "Interpretable Machine Learning Fusion and Data Analytics Models for Anomaly Detection." Fusion: Practice and Applications, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2021 ,PP. 54-69. |
| APA | Ahmed Abdelmonem,Nehal N. Mostafa. (2021). Interpretable Machine Learning Fusion and Data Analytics Models for Anomaly Detection. Fusion: Practice and Applications, 3 ( 1 ), 54-69. |
| Chicago | Ahmed Abdelmonem,Nehal N. Mostafa. "Interpretable Machine Learning Fusion and Data Analytics Models for Anomaly Detection." Fusion: Practice and Applications, 3 no. 1 (2021): 54-69. |
| Harvard | Ahmed Abdelmonem,Nehal N. Mostafa. (2021). Interpretable Machine Learning Fusion and Data Analytics Models for Anomaly Detection. Fusion: Practice and Applications, 3 ( 1 ), 54-69. |
| Vancouver | Ahmed Abdelmonem,Nehal N. Mostafa. Interpretable Machine Learning Fusion and Data Analytics Models for Anomaly Detection. Fusion: Practice and Applications, (2021); 3 ( 1 ): 54-69. |
| IEEE | Ahmed Abdelmonem,Nehal N. Mostafa, Interpretable Machine Learning Fusion and Data Analytics Models for Anomaly Detection, Fusion: Practice and Applications, Vol. 3 , No. 1 , (2021) : 54-69 (Doi : https://doi.org/10.54216/FPA.030104) |