Leveraging rationales to improve human task performance

Machine learning (ML) systems across many application areas are increasingly demonstrating performance that is beyond that of humans. In response to the proliferation of such models, the field of Explainable AI (XAI) has sought to develop techniques that enhance the transparency and interpretability of machine learning methods. In this work, we consider a question not previously explored within the XAI and ML communities: Given a computational system whose performance exceeds that of its human user, can explainable AI capabilities be leveraged to improve the performance of the human? We study this question in the context of the game of Chess, for which computational game engines that surpass the performance of the average player are widely available. We introduce the Rationale-Generating Algorithm, an automated technique for generating rationales for utility-based computational methods, which we evaluate with a multi-day user study against two baselines. The results show that our approach produces rationales that lead to statistically significant improvement in human task performance, demonstrating that rationales automatically generated from an AI's internal task model can be used not only to explain what the system is doing, but also to instruct the user and ultimately improve their task performance.

[1]  Quanshi Zhang,et al.  Interpreting CNNs via Decision Trees , 2018, 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[2]  Quanshi Zhang,et al.  Interpreting CNN knowledge via an Explanatory Graph , 2017, AAAI.

[3]  Samy S. Abu Naser,et al.  Knowledge-based Intelligent Tutoring System for Teaching Mongo Database , 2017 .

[4]  Amina Adadi,et al.  Peeking Inside the Black-Box: A Survey on Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) , 2018, IEEE Access.

[5]  David W. Aha,et al.  DARPA's Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) Program , 2019, AI Mag..

[6]  Samy S. Abu Naser,et al.  An intelligent tutoring system for teaching advanced topics in information security , 2016 .

[7]  Roberto Cipolla,et al.  MultiNet: Real-time Joint Semantic Reasoning for Autonomous Driving , 2016, 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[8]  Nick Montfort,et al.  Racing the Beam: The Atari Video Computer System , 2009 .

[9]  Kristy Elizabeth Boyer,et al.  Investigating the Relationship Between Dialogue Structure and Tutoring Effectiveness: A Hidden Markov Modeling Approach , 2011, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[10]  Stephen Muggleton,et al.  Learning optimal chess strategies , 1994, Machine Intelligence 13.

[11]  P. Dourish,et al.  Context-Aware Computing , 2001 .

[12]  Percy Liang,et al.  Understanding Black-box Predictions via Influence Functions , 2017, ICML.

[13]  Maria Fox,et al.  PDDL+ Planning with Temporal Pattern Databases , 2017, AAAI Workshops.

[14]  Keith Cheverst,et al.  Exploring Issues of User Model Transparency and Proactive Behaviour in an Office Environment Control System , 2005, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[15]  Daniel S. Kermany,et al.  Identifying Medical Diagnoses and Treatable Diseases by Image-Based Deep Learning , 2018, Cell.

[16]  Judy Kay,et al.  Special Issue: Best of ITS 2010 , 2011, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[17]  Mark O. Riedl,et al.  Automated rationale generation: a technique for explainable AI and its effects on human perceptions , 2019, IUI.

[18]  Mike Wu,et al.  Beyond Sparsity: Tree Regularization of Deep Models for Interpretability , 2017, AAAI.

[19]  Neil Charness,et al.  The role of deliberate practice in chess expertise , 2005 .

[20]  Gerd Kortuem,et al.  Conversations with my washing machine: an in-the-wild study of demand shifting with self-generated energy , 2014, UbiComp.

[21]  Shi Feng,et al.  What can AI do for me?: evaluating machine learning interpretations in cooperative play , 2019, IUI.

[22]  Alistair Sutcliffe,et al.  Domain Knowledge for Interactive System Design , 1996, IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology.

[23]  Jure Leskovec,et al.  Interpretable Decision Sets: A Joint Framework for Description and Prediction , 2016, KDD.

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

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

[26]  Quanshi Zhang,et al.  Visual interpretability for deep learning: a survey , 2018, Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering.

[27]  Mohan S. Kankanhalli,et al.  Trends and Trajectories for Explainable, Accountable and Intelligible Systems: An HCI Research Agenda , 2018, CHI.

[28]  R. Kennedy,et al.  Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Change 1 , 1996 .

[29]  H. Simon,et al.  Skill in Chess , 1988 .

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

[31]  Sarvapali D. Ramchurn,et al.  Doing the laundry with agents: a field trial of a future smart energy system in the home , 2014, CHI.

[32]  Andrea Vedaldi,et al.  Interpretable Explanations of Black Boxes by Meaningful Perturbation , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[33]  Feng-Hsiung Hsu,et al.  IBM's Deep Blue Chess grandmaster chips , 1999, IEEE Micro.

[34]  Cynthia Rudin,et al.  Interpretable classifiers using rules and Bayesian analysis: Building a better stroke prediction model , 2015, ArXiv.