Fostering interpretability of data mining models through data perturbation

Abstract With the widespread adoption of data mining models to solve real-world problems, the scientific community is facing the need of increasing their interpretability and comprehensibility. This is especially relevant in the case of black box models, in which inputs and outputs are usually connected by highly complex and nonlinear functions; in applications requiring an interaction between the user and the model; and when the machine’s solution disagrees with the human experience. In this contribution we present a new methodology that allows to simplify the process of understanding the rules behind a classification model, even in the case of black box ones. It is based on the perturbation of the features describing one instance, and on finding the minimal variation required to change the forecasted class. It thus yields simplified rules describing under which circumstances would the solution have been different, and allows to compare these with the human expectation. We show how such methodology is well defined, model-agnostic, easy to implement and modular; and demonstrate its usefulness with several synthetic and real-world data sets.

[1]  S. Yoon,et al.  Transportation security decision support system for emergency response: A training prototype , 2008, Decis. Support Syst..

[2]  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).

[3]  Olvi L. Mangasarian,et al.  Nuclear feature extraction for breast tumor diagnosis , 1993, Electronic Imaging.

[4]  Xiaogang Wang,et al.  Medical image classification with convolutional neural network , 2014, 2014 13th International Conference on Control Automation Robotics & Vision (ICARCV).

[5]  Pat Langley,et al.  Discovering Communicable Scientific Knowledge from Spatio-Temporal Data , 2001, ICML.

[6]  Omer Levy,et al.  Neural Word Embedding as Implicit Matrix Factorization , 2014, NIPS.

[7]  Saso Dzeroski,et al.  The utility of background knowledge in learning medical diagnostic rules , 1993, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[8]  Wojciech Samek,et al.  Methods for interpreting and understanding deep neural networks , 2017, Digit. Signal Process..

[9]  Masumi Ishikawa Rule extraction by successive regularization , 2000, Neural Networks.

[10]  Gaël Varoquaux,et al.  Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python , 2011, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[11]  Dympna O'Sullivan,et al.  The Role of Explanations on Trust and Reliance in Clinical Decision Support Systems , 2015, 2015 International Conference on Healthcare Informatics.

[12]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[13]  William Nick Street,et al.  Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Prognosis Via Linear Programming , 1995, Oper. Res..

[14]  Benoît Frénay,et al.  Interpretability of machine learning models and representations: an introduction , 2016, ESANN.

[15]  Jinyan Li,et al.  Efficient mining of emerging patterns: discovering trends and differences , 1999, KDD '99.

[16]  Vipin Kumar,et al.  Similarity Measures for Categorical Data: A Comparative Evaluation , 2008, SDM.

[17]  Achim Zeileis,et al.  Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[18]  Andrew Georgiou,et al.  A review of measurement practice in studies of clinical decision support systems 1998–2017 , 2019, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[19]  Udo Seiffert,et al.  Classification in high-dimensional spectral data: Accuracy vs. interpretability vs. model size , 2014, Neurocomputing.

[20]  Igor Kononenko,et al.  Inductive and Bayesian learning in medical diagnosis , 1993, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[21]  M. Sousa,et al.  The impact of acetate metabolism on yeast fermentative performance and wine quality: reduction of volatile acidity of grape musts and wines , 2010, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

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

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

[24]  D. H. Ryan Misdiagnosis in dementia: Comparisons of diagnostic error rate and range of hospital investigation according to medical speciality , 1994 .

[25]  C Wittekind,et al.  Computerized morphometric image analysis of cytologic nuclear parameters in breast cancer. , 1987, Analytical and quantitative cytology and histology.

[26]  Emily Chen,et al.  How do Humans Understand Explanations from Machine Learning Systems? An Evaluation of the Human-Interpretability of Explanation , 2018, ArXiv.

[27]  C. Hwang Simulated annealing: Theory and applications , 1988, Acta Applicandae Mathematicae - An International Survey Journal on Applying Mathematics and Mathematical Applications.

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

[29]  R. Boulton,et al.  Principles and Practices of Winemaking , 1995 .

[30]  Antanas Verikas,et al.  Mining data with random forests: A survey and results of new tests , 2011, Pattern Recognit..

[31]  Eta S. Berner,et al.  Clinical Decision Support Systems , 1999, Health Informatics.

[32]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[33]  Niklas Lavesson,et al.  User-oriented Assessment of Classification Model Understandability , 2011, SCAI.

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

[35]  Jing-Yu Yang,et al.  Optimal discriminant plane for a small number of samples and design method of classifier on the plane , 1991, Pattern Recognit..

[36]  Motoaki Kawanabe,et al.  How to Explain Individual Classification Decisions , 2009, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[37]  Leo Breiman,et al.  Statistical Modeling: The Two Cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author) , 2001 .

[38]  Hendrik Blockeel,et al.  Seeing the Forest Through the Trees , 2007, ILP.

[39]  Been Kim,et al.  iBCM: Interactive Bayesian Case Model Empowering Humans via Intuitive Interaction , 2015 .

[40]  D. Silverman,et al.  Accuracy of early diagnosis and its impact on the management and course of Alzheimer’s disease , 2004, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[41]  Carlos Guestrin,et al.  Model-Agnostic Interpretability of Machine Learning , 2016, ArXiv.

[42]  Bernard Grabot,et al.  Generating knowledge in maintenance from Experience Feedback , 2014, Knowl. Based Syst..

[43]  G. Wilcock,et al.  Assessment of dementia , 2005 .

[44]  Seyed-Ahmad Ahmadi,et al.  V-Net: Fully Convolutional Neural Networks for Volumetric Medical Image Segmentation , 2016, 2016 Fourth International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV).

[45]  Ivan Bratko,et al.  Machine Learning: Between Accuracy and Interpretability , 1997 .

[46]  B Vasavi,et al.  Significance of nuclear morphometry in benign and malignant breast aspirates , 2013, International journal of applied & basic medical research.

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

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

[49]  Cynthia Rudin,et al.  An Interpretable Stroke Prediction Model using Rules and Bayesian Analysis , 2013, AAAI.

[50]  Huai Li,et al.  Artificial convolution neural network for medical image pattern recognition , 1995, Neural Networks.

[51]  Lawrence. Davis,et al.  Handbook Of Genetic Algorithms , 1990 .

[52]  Paulo Cortez,et al.  Modeling wine preferences by data mining from physicochemical properties , 2009, Decis. Support Syst..

[53]  Jan Gerretzen,et al.  Boosting model performance and interpretation by entangling preprocessing selection and variable selection. , 2016, Analytica chimica acta.

[54]  G. Capellá,et al.  Recent advances in cancer therapy: an overview. , 2010, Current pharmaceutical design.

[55]  Y. Collan,et al.  Nuclear morphometry in FNABs of breast disease in Libyans. , 2008, Anticancer research.

[56]  Achim Zeileis,et al.  Conditional variable importance for random forests , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[57]  Aline Lonvaud-Funel,et al.  Lactic acid bacteria in the quality improvement and depreciation of wine , 1999, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek.

[58]  Ron Kohavi,et al.  A Study of Cross-Validation and Bootstrap for Accuracy Estimation and Model Selection , 1995, IJCAI.

[59]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  Induction of Decision Trees , 1986, Machine Learning.

[60]  D. Burstein,et al.  Fine Needle Aspiration , 2004, Cancer investigation.

[61]  Wei-Yin Loh,et al.  Classification and regression trees , 2011, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

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

[63]  Howard J. Hamilton,et al.  Interestingness measures for data mining: A survey , 2006, CSUR.

[64]  Nagarajan Natarajan,et al.  Learning with Noisy Labels , 2013, NIPS.

[65]  Marcel G M Olde Rikkert,et al.  A randomized controlled trial on teaching geriatric medical decision making and cost consciousness with the serious game GeriatriX. , 2014, Journal of the American Medical Directors Association.