Interpretability of Machine Learning Solutions in Public Healthcare: The CRISP-ML Approach

Public healthcare has a history of cautious adoption for artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The rapid growth of data collection and linking capabilities combined with the increasing diversity of the data-driven AI techniques, including machine learning (ML), has brought both ubiquitous opportunities for data analytics projects and increased demands for the regulation and accountability of the outcomes of these projects. As a result, the area of interpretability and explainability of ML is gaining significant research momentum. While there has been some progress in the development of ML methods, the methodological side has shown limited progress. This limits the practicality of using ML in the health domain: the issues with explaining the outcomes of ML algorithms to medical practitioners and policy makers in public health has been a recognized obstacle to the broader adoption of data science approaches in this domain. This study builds on the earlier work which introduced CRISP-ML, a methodology that determines the interpretability level required by stakeholders for a successful real-world solution and then helps in achieving it. CRISP-ML was built on the strengths of CRISP-DM, addressing the gaps in handling interpretability. Its application in the Public Healthcare sector follows its successful deployment in a number of recent real-world projects across several industries and fields, including credit risk, insurance, utilities, and sport. This study elaborates on the CRISP-ML methodology on the determination, measurement, and achievement of the necessary level of interpretability of ML solutions in the Public Healthcare sector. It demonstrates how CRISP-ML addressed the problems with data diversity, the unstructured nature of data, and relatively low linkage between diverse data sets in the healthcare domain. The characteristics of the case study, used in the study, are typical for healthcare data, and CRISP-ML managed to deliver on these issues, ensuring the required level of interpretability of the ML solutions discussed in the project. The approach used ensured that interpretability requirements were met, taking into account public healthcare specifics, regulatory requirements, project stakeholders, project objectives, and data characteristics. The study concludes with the three main directions for the development of the presented cross-industry standard process.

[1]  Przemyslaw Biecek,et al.  iBreakDown: Uncertainty of Model Explanations for Non-additive Predictive Models , 2019, ArXiv.

[2]  Jeffrey S. Saltz,et al.  The need for new processes, methodologies and tools to support big data teams and improve big data project effectiveness , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data).

[3]  Andy Koronios,et al.  Towards A Process View on Critical Success Factors in Big Data Analytics Projects , 2015, AMCIS.

[4]  Alfredo Vellido,et al.  The importance of interpretability and visualization in machine learning for applications in medicine and health care , 2019, Neural Computing and Applications.

[5]  Aditya G. Parameswaran,et al.  DataHub: Collaborative Data Science & Dataset Version Management at Scale , 2014, CIDR.

[6]  Marinka Zitnik,et al.  Interpretability of machine learning‐based prediction models in healthcare , 2020, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[7]  Susan Athey,et al.  The Impact of Machine Learning on Economics , 2018, The Economics of Artificial Intelligence.

[8]  Scott Lundberg,et al.  A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions , 2017, NIPS.

[9]  Carlos Guestrin,et al.  "Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier , 2016, ArXiv.

[10]  Samuel J. Gershman,et al.  Human Evaluation of Models Built for Interpretability , 2019, HCOMP.

[11]  Carolyn McGregor,et al.  Extending CRISP-DM to incorporate temporal data mining of multidimensional medical data streams: A neonatal intensive care unit case study , 2009, 2009 22nd IEEE International Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems.

[12]  J. Murphy The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) , 2018, Irish medical journal.

[13]  Simeon Simoff,et al.  Interpretability of Machine Learning Solutions in Industrial Decision Engineering , 2019, AusDM.

[14]  Alex Alves Freitas,et al.  Comprehensible classification models: a position paper , 2014, SKDD.

[15]  Zachary Chase Lipton The mythos of model interpretability , 2016, ACM Queue.

[16]  Sören Preibusch,et al.  Toward Accountable Discrimination-Aware Data Mining: The Importance of Keeping the Human in the Loop - and Under the Looking Glass , 2017, Big Data.

[17]  Tim Miller,et al.  Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences , 2017, Artif. Intell..

[18]  Lars Kai Hansen,et al.  Interpretability in Intelligent Systems - A New Concept? , 2019, Explainable AI.

[19]  Wo L. Chang,et al.  Big Data: Challenges, practices and technologies: NIST Big Data Public Working Group workshop at IEEE Big Data 2014 , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data).

[20]  Adrian Weller,et al.  Transparency: Motivations and Challenges , 2019, Explainable AI.

[21]  Olfa Nasraoui,et al.  Evolution and impact of bias in human and machine learning algorithm interaction , 2020, PloS one.

[22]  M. Chavent,et al.  ClustOfVar: An R Package for the Clustering of Variables , 2011, 1112.0295.

[23]  Gonzalo Mariscal,et al.  A survey of data mining and knowledge discovery process models and methodologies , 2010, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[24]  Christian Biemann,et al.  What do we need to build explainable AI systems for the medical domain? , 2017, ArXiv.

[25]  Johannes Gehrke,et al.  Intelligible Models for HealthCare: Predicting Pneumonia Risk and Hospital 30-day Readmission , 2015, KDD.

[26]  Stefan Hajkowicz,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: Australia’s ethics framework , 2019 .

[27]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Comparing Data Science Project Management Methodologies via a Controlled Experiment , 2017, HICSS.

[28]  Keith Darlington,et al.  Designing for Explanation in Health Care Applications of Expert Systems , 2011 .

[29]  Bernd Bischl,et al.  Quantifying Interpretability of Arbitrary Machine Learning Models Through Functional Decomposition , 2019, ArXiv.

[30]  T. Davenport,et al.  The potential for artificial intelligence in healthcare , 2019, Future Healthcare Journal.

[31]  M. Dumas,et al.  Towards a Data Mining Methodology for the Banking Domain , 2018 .

[32]  Przemyslaw Biecek,et al.  Interpretable Meta-Measure for Model Performance , 2020, ArXiv.

[33]  A. Hanuschkin,et al.  Towards CRISP-ML(Q): A Machine Learning Process Model with Quality Assurance Methodology , 2020, Mach. Learn. Knowl. Extr..

[34]  Junaid Qadir,et al.  Secure and Robust Machine Learning for Healthcare: A Survey , 2020, IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering.

[35]  Cecilia Testart,et al.  Explaining Explanations to Society , 2019, ArXiv.

[36]  Pavol Tanuska,et al.  Proposal of Effective Preprocessing Techniques of Financial Data , 2018, 2018 IEEE 22nd International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems (INES).

[37]  J. Alberto Espinosa,et al.  The Big Data Analytics Gold Rush: A Research Framework for Coordination and Governance , 2016, 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS).

[38]  Victor Chang,et al.  A review and future direction of agile, business intelligence, analytics and data science , 2016, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[39]  Ankur Teredesai,et al.  Interpretable Machine Learning in Healthcare , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Healthcare Informatics (ICHI).

[40]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[41]  Olegas Niaksu CRISP Data Mining Methodology Extension for Medical Domain , 2015 .

[42]  Chris Russell,et al.  Explaining Explanations in AI , 2018, FAT.

[43]  Arantza Illarramendi,et al.  Business understanding, challenges and issues of Big Data Analytics for the servitization of a capital equipment manufacturer , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data).

[44]  Jagadish S. Kallimani,et al.  A survey on various challenges and aspects in handling big data , 2017, 2017 International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Communication, Computer, and Optimization Techniques (ICEECCOT).

[45]  Nada Philip,et al.  A Lean Design Thinking Methodology (LDTM) for Machine Learning and Modern Data Projects , 2018, 2018 10th Computer Science and Electronic Engineering (CEEC).

[46]  Franco Turini,et al.  A Survey of Methods for Explaining Black Box Models , 2018, ACM Comput. Surv..

[47]  Michael Gleicher,et al.  A Framework for Considering Comprehensibility in Modeling , 2016, Big Data.

[48]  Been Kim,et al.  Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning , 2017, 1702.08608.

[49]  S. Horvath,et al.  Unsupervised Learning With Random Forest Predictors , 2006 .

[50]  Lalana Kagal,et al.  Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning , 2018, 2018 IEEE 5th International Conference on Data Science and Advanced Analytics (DSAA).

[51]  Sam Ransbotham,et al.  Minding the analytics gap , 2015 .

[52]  Jaime S. Cardoso,et al.  Machine Learning Interpretability: A Survey on Methods and Metrics , 2019, Electronics.

[53]  Jeffrey S. Saltz,et al.  Big data team process methodologies: A literature review and the identification of key factors for a project's success , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data).

[54]  Jian-Xun Mi,et al.  Review Study of Interpretation Methods for Future Interpretable Machine Learning , 2020, IEEE Access.

[55]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Towards Explainable Artificial Intelligence , 2019, Explainable AI.

[56]  Tianqi Chen,et al.  XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System , 2016, KDD.

[57]  Franziska Schäfer,et al.  Synthesizing CRISP-DM and Quality Management: A Data Mining Approach for Production Processes , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Technology Management, Operations and Decisions (ICTMOD).

[58]  Nick Wallace,et al.  The Impact of the EU’s New Data Protection Regulation on AI , 2018 .

[59]  Ahmed H. Yousef,et al.  A data mining experimentation framework to improve six sigma projects , 2017, 2017 13th International Computer Engineering Conference (ICENCO).

[60]  Tommi S. Jaakkola,et al.  Towards Robust Interpretability with Self-Explaining Neural Networks , 2018, NeurIPS.

[61]  Cynthia Rudin,et al.  Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead , 2018, Nature Machine Intelligence.

[62]  Chandan Singh,et al.  Definitions, methods, and applications in interpretable machine learning , 2019, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[63]  Carolyn McGregor,et al.  A comprehensive framework design for continuous quality improvement within the neonatal intensive care unit: Integration of the SPOE, CRISP-DM and PaJMa models , 2014, IEEE-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical and Health Informatics (BHI).

[64]  David B. Skillicorn,et al.  Integrative Visual Data Mining of Biomedical Data: Investigating Cases in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia , 2008, Visual Data Mining.