Evaluating the Robustness of Interpretability Methods through Explanation Invariance and Equivariance

AI-generated keywords: Interpretability Robustness Symmetry Group Invariance Equivariance

AI-generated Key Points

  • Interpretability methods are crucial for understanding complex machine learning models.
  • Explanation invariance and equivariance are necessary to ensure accurate explanations of these models.
  • Two metrics, invariance and equivariance scores, can measure the robustness of interpretability methods with respect to model symmetry groups.
  • The authors provide theoretical robustness guarantees for some popular interpretability methods and a systematic approach to increase their invariance with respect to a symmetry group.
  • Empirical measurements of the metrics were conducted on various modalities and symmetry groups, leading to five guidelines for producing robust explanations:
  • Use multiple symmetries when aggregating explanations
  • Ensure interpretations are consistent across different samples within a dataset
  • Evaluate interpretability methods on diverse datasets with varying levels of complexity
  • Test interpretability methods on models trained with different hyperparameters or architectures
  • Use domain-specific knowledge when designing interpretation tasks
  • Following these guidelines can lead to more reliable interpretations that accurately capture the underlying mechanisms driving complex machine learning models.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Jonathan Crabbé, Mihaela van der Schaar

26 pages, 7 figures
License: CC BY 4.0

Abstract: Interpretability methods are valuable only if their explanations faithfully describe the explained model. In this work, we consider neural networks whose predictions are invariant under a specific symmetry group. This includes popular architectures, ranging from convolutional to graph neural networks. Any explanation that faithfully explains this type of model needs to be in agreement with this invariance property. We formalize this intuition through the notion of explanation invariance and equivariance by leveraging the formalism from geometric deep learning. Through this rigorous formalism, we derive (1) two metrics to measure the robustness of any interpretability method with respect to the model symmetry group; (2) theoretical robustness guarantees for some popular interpretability methods and (3) a systematic approach to increase the invariance of any interpretability method with respect to a symmetry group. By empirically measuring our metrics for explanations of models associated with various modalities and symmetry groups, we derive a set of 5 guidelines to allow users and developers of interpretability methods to produce robust explanations.

Submitted to arXiv on 13 Apr. 2023

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2304.06715v1

Interpretability methods are essential for understanding the inner workings of complex machine learning models. To ensure that any explanation accurately explains this type of model, it needs to be in agreement with its invariance property. The authors formalize this intuition through the notion of explanation invariance and equivariance by leveraging the formalism from geometric deep learning. They derive two metrics to measure the robustness of any interpretability method with respect to the model symmetry group: invariance and equivariance scores. The authors also introduce theoretical robustness guarantees for some popular interpretability methods and a systematic approach to increase their invariance with respect to a symmetry group. The authors empirically measure their metrics for explanations of models associated with various modalities and symmetry groups and derive a set of five guidelines to allow users and developers of interpretability methods to produce robust explanations. These guidelines include using multiple symmetries when aggregating explanations, ensuring that interpretations are consistent across different samples within a dataset, evaluating interpretability methods on diverse datasets with varying levels of complexity, testing interpretability methods on models trained with different hyperparameters or architectures, and using domain-specific knowledge when designing interpretation tasks. Overall, this work provides insights into how researchers can evaluate the robustness of interpretability methods and improve their performance by considering specific properties of machine learning models such as their symmetry groups. By following these guidelines, users can produce more reliable interpretations that accurately capture the underlying mechanisms driving complex machine learning models.
Created on 14 Apr. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.