-
Map** the Potential of Explainable AI for Fairness Along the AI Lifecycle
Authors:
Luca Deck,
Astrid Schomäcker,
Timo Speith,
Jakob Schöffer,
Lena Kästner,
Niklas Kühl
Abstract:
The widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems across various domains is increasingly surfacing issues related to algorithmic fairness, especially in high-stakes scenarios. Thus, critical considerations of how fairness in AI systems might be improved -- and what measures are available to aid this process -- are overdue. Many researchers and policymakers see explainable AI (XAI) as a pr…
▽ More
The widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems across various domains is increasingly surfacing issues related to algorithmic fairness, especially in high-stakes scenarios. Thus, critical considerations of how fairness in AI systems might be improved -- and what measures are available to aid this process -- are overdue. Many researchers and policymakers see explainable AI (XAI) as a promising way to increase fairness in AI systems. However, there is a wide variety of XAI methods and fairness conceptions expressing different desiderata, and the precise connections between XAI and fairness remain largely nebulous. Besides, different measures to increase algorithmic fairness might be applicable at different points throughout an AI system's lifecycle. Yet, there currently is no coherent map** of fairness desiderata along the AI lifecycle. In this paper, we we distill eight fairness desiderata, map them along the AI lifecycle, and discuss how XAI could help address each of them. We hope to provide orientation for practical applications and to inspire XAI research specifically focused on these fairness desiderata.
△ Less
Submitted 27 June, 2024; v1 submitted 29 April, 2024;
originally announced April 2024.
-
"I Want It That Way": Enabling Interactive Decision Support Using Large Language Models and Constraint Programming
Authors:
Connor Lawless,
Jakob Schoeffer,
Lindy Le,
Kael Rowan,
Shilad Sen,
Cristina St. Hill,
**a Suh,
Bahareh Sarrafzadeh
Abstract:
A critical factor in the success of decision support systems is the accurate modeling of user preferences. Psychology research has demonstrated that users often develop their preferences during the elicitation process, highlighting the pivotal role of system-user interaction in develo** personalized systems. This paper introduces a novel approach, combining Large Language Models (LLMs) with Cons…
▽ More
A critical factor in the success of decision support systems is the accurate modeling of user preferences. Psychology research has demonstrated that users often develop their preferences during the elicitation process, highlighting the pivotal role of system-user interaction in develo** personalized systems. This paper introduces a novel approach, combining Large Language Models (LLMs) with Constraint Programming to facilitate interactive decision support. We study this hybrid framework through the lens of meeting scheduling, a time-consuming daily activity faced by a multitude of information workers. We conduct three studies to evaluate the novel framework, including a diary study (n=64) to characterize contextual scheduling preferences, a quantitative evaluation of the system's performance, and a user study (n=10) with a prototype system. Our work highlights the potential for a hybrid LLM and optimization approach for iterative preference elicitation and design considerations for building systems that support human-system collaborative decision-making processes.
△ Less
Submitted 12 February, 2024; v1 submitted 11 December, 2023;
originally announced December 2023.
-
A Critical Survey on Fairness Benefits of Explainable AI
Authors:
Luca Deck,
Jakob Schoeffer,
Maria De-Arteaga,
Niklas Kühl
Abstract:
In this critical survey, we analyze typical claims on the relationship between explainable AI (XAI) and fairness to disentangle the multidimensional relationship between these two concepts. Based on a systematic literature review and a subsequent qualitative content analysis, we identify seven archetypal claims from 175 scientific articles on the alleged fairness benefits of XAI. We present crucia…
▽ More
In this critical survey, we analyze typical claims on the relationship between explainable AI (XAI) and fairness to disentangle the multidimensional relationship between these two concepts. Based on a systematic literature review and a subsequent qualitative content analysis, we identify seven archetypal claims from 175 scientific articles on the alleged fairness benefits of XAI. We present crucial caveats with respect to these claims and provide an entry point for future discussions around the potentials and limitations of XAI for specific fairness desiderata. Importantly, we notice that claims are often (i) vague and simplistic, (ii) lacking normative grounding, or (iii) poorly aligned with the actual capabilities of XAI. We suggest to conceive XAI not as an ethical panacea but as one of many tools to approach the multidimensional, sociotechnical challenge of algorithmic fairness. Moreover, when making a claim about XAI and fairness, we emphasize the need to be more specific about what kind of XAI method is used, which fairness desideratum it refers to, how exactly it enables fairness, and who is the stakeholder that benefits from XAI.
△ Less
Submitted 7 May, 2024; v1 submitted 15 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
On the Interdependence of Reliance Behavior and Accuracy in AI-Assisted Decision-Making
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Johannes Jakubik,
Michael Voessing,
Niklas Kuehl,
Gerhard Satzger
Abstract:
In AI-assisted decision-making, a central promise of putting a human in the loop is that they should be able to complement the AI system by adhering to its correct and overriding its mistaken recommendations. In practice, however, we often see that humans tend to over- or under-rely on AI recommendations, meaning that they either adhere to wrong or override correct recommendations. Such reliance b…
▽ More
In AI-assisted decision-making, a central promise of putting a human in the loop is that they should be able to complement the AI system by adhering to its correct and overriding its mistaken recommendations. In practice, however, we often see that humans tend to over- or under-rely on AI recommendations, meaning that they either adhere to wrong or override correct recommendations. Such reliance behavior is detrimental to decision-making accuracy. In this work, we articulate and analyze the interdependence between reliance behavior and accuracy in AI-assisted decision-making, which has been largely neglected in prior work. We also propose a visual framework to make this interdependence more tangible. This framework helps us interpret and compare empirical findings, as well as obtain a nuanced understanding of the effects of interventions (e.g., explanations) in AI-assisted decision-making. Finally, we infer several interesting properties from the framework: (i) when humans under-rely on AI recommendations, there may be no possibility for them to complement the AI in terms of decision-making accuracy; (ii) when humans cannot discern correct and wrong AI recommendations, no such improvement can be expected either; (iii) interventions may lead to an increase in decision-making accuracy that is solely driven by an increase in humans' adherence to AI recommendations, without any ability to discern correct and wrong. Our work emphasizes the importance of measuring and reporting both effects on accuracy and reliance behavior when empirically assessing interventions.
△ Less
Submitted 18 April, 2023;
originally announced April 2023.
-
Explanations, Fairness, and Appropriate Reliance in Human-AI Decision-Making
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Maria De-Arteaga,
Niklas Kuehl
Abstract:
In this work, we study the effects of feature-based explanations on distributive fairness of AI-assisted decisions, specifically focusing on the task of predicting occupations from short textual bios. We also investigate how any effects are mediated by humans' fairness perceptions and their reliance on AI recommendations. Our findings show that explanations influence fairness perceptions, which, i…
▽ More
In this work, we study the effects of feature-based explanations on distributive fairness of AI-assisted decisions, specifically focusing on the task of predicting occupations from short textual bios. We also investigate how any effects are mediated by humans' fairness perceptions and their reliance on AI recommendations. Our findings show that explanations influence fairness perceptions, which, in turn, relate to humans' tendency to adhere to AI recommendations. However, we see that such explanations do not enable humans to discern correct and incorrect AI recommendations. Instead, we show that they may affect reliance irrespective of the correctness of AI recommendations. Depending on which features an explanation highlights, this can foster or hinder distributive fairness: when explanations highlight features that are task-irrelevant and evidently associated with the sensitive attribute, this prompts overrides that counter AI recommendations that align with gender stereotypes. Meanwhile, if explanations appear task-relevant, this induces reliance behavior that reinforces stereotype-aligned errors. These results imply that feature-based explanations are not a reliable mechanism to improve distributive fairness.
△ Less
Submitted 18 March, 2024; v1 submitted 23 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
An Empirical Evaluation of Predicted Outcomes as Explanations in Human-AI Decision-Making
Authors:
Johannes Jakubik,
Jakob Schöffer,
Vincent Hoge,
Michael Vössing,
Niklas Kühl
Abstract:
In this work, we empirically examine human-AI decision-making in the presence of explanations based on predicted outcomes. This type of explanation provides a human decision-maker with expected consequences for each decision alternative at inference time - where the predicted outcomes are typically measured in a problem-specific unit (e.g., profit in U.S. dollars). We conducted a pilot study in th…
▽ More
In this work, we empirically examine human-AI decision-making in the presence of explanations based on predicted outcomes. This type of explanation provides a human decision-maker with expected consequences for each decision alternative at inference time - where the predicted outcomes are typically measured in a problem-specific unit (e.g., profit in U.S. dollars). We conducted a pilot study in the context of peer-to-peer lending to assess the effects of providing predicted outcomes as explanations to lay study participants. Our preliminary findings suggest that people's reliance on AI recommendations increases compared to cases where no explanation or feature-based explanations are provided, especially when the AI recommendations are incorrect. This results in a hampered ability to distinguish correct from incorrect AI recommendations, which can ultimately affect decision quality in a negative way.
△ Less
Submitted 30 August, 2022; v1 submitted 8 August, 2022;
originally announced August 2022.
-
"There Is Not Enough Information": On the Effects of Explanations on Perceptions of Informational Fairness and Trustworthiness in Automated Decision-Making
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Niklas Kuehl,
Yvette Machowski
Abstract:
Automated decision systems (ADS) are increasingly used for consequential decision-making. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque machine learning models, which do not allow for understanding how a given decision was arrived at. In this work, we conduct a human subject study to assess people's perceptions of informational fairness (i.e., whether people think they are given adequate in…
▽ More
Automated decision systems (ADS) are increasingly used for consequential decision-making. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque machine learning models, which do not allow for understanding how a given decision was arrived at. In this work, we conduct a human subject study to assess people's perceptions of informational fairness (i.e., whether people think they are given adequate information on and explanation of the process and its outcomes) and trustworthiness of an underlying ADS when provided with varying types of information about the system. More specifically, we instantiate an ADS in the area of automated loan approval and generate different explanations that are commonly used in the literature. We randomize the amount of information that study participants get to see by providing certain groups of people with the same explanations as others plus additional explanations. From our quantitative analyses, we observe that different amounts of information as well as people's (self-assessed) AI literacy significantly influence the perceived informational fairness, which, in turn, positively relates to perceived trustworthiness of the ADS. A comprehensive analysis of qualitative feedback sheds light on people's desiderata for explanations, among which are (i) consistency (both with people's expectations and across different explanations), (ii) disclosure of monotonic relationships between features and outcome, and (iii) actionability of recommendations.
△ Less
Submitted 11 May, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
A Human-Centric Perspective on Fairness and Transparency in Algorithmic Decision-Making
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer
Abstract:
Automated decision systems (ADS) are increasingly used for consequential decision-making. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque machine learning models, which do not allow for understanding how a given decision was arrived at. This is not only problematic from a legal perspective, but non-transparent systems are also prone to yield unfair outcomes because their sanity is challenging…
▽ More
Automated decision systems (ADS) are increasingly used for consequential decision-making. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque machine learning models, which do not allow for understanding how a given decision was arrived at. This is not only problematic from a legal perspective, but non-transparent systems are also prone to yield unfair outcomes because their sanity is challenging to assess and calibrate in the first place -- which is particularly worrisome for human decision-subjects. Based on this observation and building upon existing work, I aim to make the following three main contributions through my doctoral thesis: (a) understand how (potential) decision-subjects perceive algorithmic decisions (with varying degrees of transparency of the underlying ADS), as compared to similar decisions made by humans; (b) evaluate different tools for transparent decision-making with respect to their effectiveness in enabling people to appropriately assess the quality and fairness of ADS; and (c) develop human-understandable technical artifacts for fair automated decision-making. Over the course of the first half of my PhD program, I have already addressed substantial pieces of (a) and (c), whereas (b) will be the major focus of the second half.
△ Less
Submitted 29 April, 2022;
originally announced May 2022.
-
On the Relationship Between Explanations, Fairness Perceptions, and Decisions
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Maria De-Arteaga,
Niklas Kuehl
Abstract:
It is known that recommendations of AI-based systems can be incorrect or unfair. Hence, it is often proposed that a human be the final decision-maker. Prior work has argued that explanations are an essential pathway to help human decision-makers enhance decision quality and mitigate bias, i.e., facilitate human-AI complementarity. For these benefits to materialize, explanations should enable human…
▽ More
It is known that recommendations of AI-based systems can be incorrect or unfair. Hence, it is often proposed that a human be the final decision-maker. Prior work has argued that explanations are an essential pathway to help human decision-makers enhance decision quality and mitigate bias, i.e., facilitate human-AI complementarity. For these benefits to materialize, explanations should enable humans to appropriately rely on AI recommendations and override the algorithmic recommendation when necessary to increase distributive fairness of decisions. The literature, however, does not provide conclusive empirical evidence as to whether explanations enable such complementarity in practice. In this work, we (a) provide a conceptual framework to articulate the relationships between explanations, fairness perceptions, reliance, and distributive fairness, (b) apply it to understand (seemingly) contradictory research findings at the intersection of explanations and fairness, and (c) derive cohesive implications for the formulation of research questions and the design of experiments.
△ Less
Submitted 6 May, 2022; v1 submitted 27 April, 2022;
originally announced April 2022.
-
Online Platforms and the Fair Exposure Problem Under Homophily
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Alexander Ritchie,
Keziah Naggita,
Faidra Monachou,
Jessie Finocchiaro,
Marc Juarez
Abstract:
In the wake of increasing political extremism, online platforms have been criticized for contributing to polarization. One line of criticism has focused on echo chambers and the recommended content served to users by these platforms. In this work, we introduce the fair exposure problem: given limited intervention power of the platform, the goal is to enforce balance in the spread of content (e.g.,…
▽ More
In the wake of increasing political extremism, online platforms have been criticized for contributing to polarization. One line of criticism has focused on echo chambers and the recommended content served to users by these platforms. In this work, we introduce the fair exposure problem: given limited intervention power of the platform, the goal is to enforce balance in the spread of content (e.g., news articles) among two groups of users through constraints similar to those imposed by the Fairness Doctrine in the United States in the past. Groups are characterized by different affiliations (e.g., political views) and have different preferences for content. We develop a stylized framework that models intra- and intergroup content propagation under homophily, and we formulate the platform's decision as an optimization problem that aims at maximizing user engagement, potentially under fairness constraints. Our main notion of fairness requires that each group see a mixture of their preferred and non-preferred content, encouraging information diversity. Promoting such information diversity is often viewed as desirable and a potential means for breaking out of harmful echo chambers. We study the solutions to both the fairness-agnostic and fairness-aware problems. We prove that a fairness-agnostic approach inevitably leads to group-homogeneous targeting by the platform. This is only partially mitigated by imposing fairness constraints: we show that there exist optimal fairness-aware solutions which target one group with different types of content and the other group with only one type that is not necessarily the group's most preferred. Finally, using simulations with real-world data, we study the system dynamics and quantify the price of fairness.
△ Less
Submitted 10 March, 2023; v1 submitted 19 February, 2022;
originally announced February 2022.
-
Utilizing Active Machine Learning for Quality Assurance: A Case Study of Virtual Car Renderings in the Automotive Industry
Authors:
Patrick Hemmer,
Niklas Kühl,
Jakob Schöffer
Abstract:
Computer-generated imagery of car models has become an indispensable part of car manufacturers' advertisement concepts. They are for instance used in car configurators to offer customers the possibility to configure their car online according to their personal preferences. However, human-led quality assurance faces the challenge to keep up with high-volume visual inspections due to the car models'…
▽ More
Computer-generated imagery of car models has become an indispensable part of car manufacturers' advertisement concepts. They are for instance used in car configurators to offer customers the possibility to configure their car online according to their personal preferences. However, human-led quality assurance faces the challenge to keep up with high-volume visual inspections due to the car models' increasing complexity. Even though the application of machine learning to many visual inspection tasks has demonstrated great success, its need for large labeled data sets remains a central barrier to using such systems in practice. In this paper, we propose an active machine learning-based quality assurance system that requires significantly fewer labeled instances to identify defective virtual car renderings without compromising performance. By employing our system at a German automotive manufacturer, start-up difficulties can be overcome, the inspection process efficiency can be increased, and thus economic advantages can be realized.
△ Less
Submitted 18 October, 2021;
originally announced October 2021.
-
Perceptions of Fairness and Trustworthiness Based on Explanations in Human vs. Automated Decision-Making
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Yvette Machowski,
Niklas Kuehl
Abstract:
Automated decision systems (ADS) have become ubiquitous in many high-stakes domains. Those systems typically involve sophisticated yet opaque artificial intelligence (AI) techniques that seldom allow for full comprehension of their inner workings, particularly for affected individuals. As a result, ADS are prone to deficient oversight and calibration, which can lead to undesirable (e.g., unfair) o…
▽ More
Automated decision systems (ADS) have become ubiquitous in many high-stakes domains. Those systems typically involve sophisticated yet opaque artificial intelligence (AI) techniques that seldom allow for full comprehension of their inner workings, particularly for affected individuals. As a result, ADS are prone to deficient oversight and calibration, which can lead to undesirable (e.g., unfair) outcomes. In this work, we conduct an online study with 200 participants to examine people's perceptions of fairness and trustworthiness towards ADS in comparison to a scenario where a human instead of an ADS makes a high-stakes decision -- and we provide thorough identical explanations regarding decisions in both cases. Surprisingly, we find that people perceive ADS as fairer than human decision-makers. Our analyses also suggest that people's AI literacy affects their perceptions, indicating that people with higher AI literacy favor ADS more strongly over human decision-makers, whereas low-AI-literacy people exhibit no significant differences in their perceptions.
△ Less
Submitted 13 September, 2021;
originally announced September 2021.
-
Appropriate Fairness Perceptions? On the Effectiveness of Explanations in Enabling People to Assess the Fairness of Automated Decision Systems
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Niklas Kuehl
Abstract:
It is often argued that one goal of explaining automated decision systems (ADS) is to facilitate positive perceptions (e.g., fairness or trustworthiness) of users towards such systems. This viewpoint, however, makes the implicit assumption that a given ADS is fair and trustworthy, to begin with. If the ADS issues unfair outcomes, then one might expect that explanations regarding the system's worki…
▽ More
It is often argued that one goal of explaining automated decision systems (ADS) is to facilitate positive perceptions (e.g., fairness or trustworthiness) of users towards such systems. This viewpoint, however, makes the implicit assumption that a given ADS is fair and trustworthy, to begin with. If the ADS issues unfair outcomes, then one might expect that explanations regarding the system's workings will reveal its shortcomings and, hence, lead to a decrease in fairness perceptions. Consequently, we suggest that it is more meaningful to evaluate explanations against their effectiveness in enabling people to appropriately assess the quality (e.g., fairness) of an associated ADS. We argue that for an effective explanation, perceptions of fairness should increase if and only if the underlying ADS is fair. In this in-progress work, we introduce the desideratum of appropriate fairness perceptions, propose a novel study design for evaluating it, and outline next steps towards a comprehensive experiment.
△ Less
Submitted 14 August, 2021;
originally announced August 2021.
-
Detecting Concept Drift With Neural Network Model Uncertainty
Authors:
Lucas Baier,
Tim Schlör,
Jakob Schöffer,
Niklas Kühl
Abstract:
Deployed machine learning models are confronted with the problem of changing data over time, a phenomenon also called concept drift. While existing approaches of concept drift detection already show convincing results, they require true labels as a prerequisite for successful drift detection. Especially in many real-world application scenarios-like the ones covered in this work-true labels are sca…
▽ More
Deployed machine learning models are confronted with the problem of changing data over time, a phenomenon also called concept drift. While existing approaches of concept drift detection already show convincing results, they require true labels as a prerequisite for successful drift detection. Especially in many real-world application scenarios-like the ones covered in this work-true labels are scarce, and their acquisition is expensive. Therefore, we introduce a new algorithm for drift detection, Uncertainty Drift Detection (UDD), which is able to detect drifts without access to true labels. Our approach is based on the uncertainty estimates provided by a deep neural network in combination with Monte Carlo Dropout. Structural changes over time are detected by applying the ADWIN technique on the uncertainty estimates, and detected drifts trigger a retraining of the prediction model. In contrast to input data-based drift detection, our approach considers the effects of the current input data on the properties of the prediction model rather than detecting change on the input data only (which can lead to unnecessary retrainings). We show that UDD outperforms other state-of-the-art strategies on two synthetic as well as ten real-world data sets for both regression and classification tasks.
△ Less
Submitted 23 September, 2022; v1 submitted 5 July, 2021;
originally announced July 2021.
-
A Study on Fairness and Trust Perceptions in Automated Decision Making
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Yvette Machowski,
Niklas Kuehl
Abstract:
Automated decision systems are increasingly used for consequential decision making -- for a variety of reasons. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque models, which do not (or hardly) allow for understanding how or why a given decision was arrived at. This is not only problematic from a legal perspective, but non-transparent systems are also prone to yield undesirable (e.g., unfair)…
▽ More
Automated decision systems are increasingly used for consequential decision making -- for a variety of reasons. These systems often rely on sophisticated yet opaque models, which do not (or hardly) allow for understanding how or why a given decision was arrived at. This is not only problematic from a legal perspective, but non-transparent systems are also prone to yield undesirable (e.g., unfair) outcomes because their sanity is difficult to assess and calibrate in the first place. In this work, we conduct a study to evaluate different attempts of explaining such systems with respect to their effect on people's perceptions of fairness and trustworthiness towards the underlying mechanisms. A pilot study revealed surprising qualitative insights as well as preliminary significant effects, which will have to be verified, extended and thoroughly discussed in the larger main study.
△ Less
Submitted 8 March, 2021;
originally announced March 2021.
-
A Ranking Approach to Fair Classification
Authors:
Jakob Schoeffer,
Niklas Kuehl,
Isabel Valera
Abstract:
Algorithmic decision systems are increasingly used in areas such as hiring, school admission, or loan approval. Typically, these systems rely on labeled data for training a classification model. However, in many scenarios, ground-truth labels are unavailable, and instead we have only access to imperfect labels as the result of (potentially biased) human-made decisions. Despite being imperfect, his…
▽ More
Algorithmic decision systems are increasingly used in areas such as hiring, school admission, or loan approval. Typically, these systems rely on labeled data for training a classification model. However, in many scenarios, ground-truth labels are unavailable, and instead we have only access to imperfect labels as the result of (potentially biased) human-made decisions. Despite being imperfect, historical decisions often contain some useful information on the unobserved true labels. In this paper, we focus on scenarios where only imperfect labels are available and propose a new fair ranking-based decision system based on monotonic relationships between legitimate features and the outcome. Our approach is both intuitive and easy to implement, and thus particularly suitable for adoption in real-world settings. More in detail, we introduce a distance-based decision criterion, which incorporates useful information from historical decisions and accounts for unwanted correlation between protected and legitimate features. Through extensive experiments on synthetic and real-world data, we show that our method is fair in the sense that a) it assigns the desirable outcome to the most qualified individuals, and b) it removes the effect of stereotypes in decision-making, thereby outperforming traditional classification algorithms. Additionally, we are able to show theoretically that our method is consistent with a prominent concept of individual fairness which states that "similar individuals should be treated similarly."
△ Less
Submitted 16 July, 2021; v1 submitted 8 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
Utilizing Concept Drift for Measuring the Effectiveness of Policy Interventions: The Case of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Authors:
Lucas Baier,
Niklas Kühl,
Jakob Schöffer,
Gerhard Satzger
Abstract:
As a reaction to the high infectiousness and lethality of the COVID-19 virus, countries around the world have adopted drastic policy measures to contain the pandemic. However, it remains unclear which effect these measures, so-called non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), have on the spread of the virus. In this article, we use machine learning and apply drift detection methods in a novel way to…
▽ More
As a reaction to the high infectiousness and lethality of the COVID-19 virus, countries around the world have adopted drastic policy measures to contain the pandemic. However, it remains unclear which effect these measures, so-called non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), have on the spread of the virus. In this article, we use machine learning and apply drift detection methods in a novel way to predict the time lag of policy interventions with respect to the development of daily case numbers of COVID-19 across 9 European countries and 28 US states. Our analysis shows that there are, on average, more than two weeks between NPI enactment and a drift in the case numbers.
△ Less
Submitted 9 August, 2021; v1 submitted 4 December, 2020;
originally announced December 2020.
-
DEAL: Deep Evidential Active Learning for Image Classification
Authors:
Patrick Hemmer,
Niklas Kühl,
Jakob Schöffer
Abstract:
Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) have proven to be state-of-the-art models for supervised computer vision tasks, such as image classification. However, large labeled data sets are generally needed for the training and validation of such models. In many domains, unlabeled data is available but labeling is expensive, for instance when specific expert knowledge is required. Active Learning (AL) i…
▽ More
Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) have proven to be state-of-the-art models for supervised computer vision tasks, such as image classification. However, large labeled data sets are generally needed for the training and validation of such models. In many domains, unlabeled data is available but labeling is expensive, for instance when specific expert knowledge is required. Active Learning (AL) is one approach to mitigate the problem of limited labeled data. Through selecting the most informative and representative data instances for labeling, AL can contribute to more efficient learning of the model. Recent AL methods for CNNs propose different solutions for the selection of instances to be labeled. However, they do not perform consistently well and are often computationally expensive. In this paper, we propose a novel AL algorithm that efficiently learns from unlabeled data by capturing high prediction uncertainty. By replacing the softmax standard output of a CNN with the parameters of a Dirichlet density, the model learns to identify data instances that contribute efficiently to improving model performance during training. We demonstrate in several experiments with publicly available data that our method consistently outperforms other state-of-the-art AL approaches. It can be easily implemented and does not require extensive computational resources for training. Additionally, we are able to show the benefits of the approach on a real-world medical use case in the field of automated detection of visual signals for pneumonia on chest radiographs.
△ Less
Submitted 27 October, 2020; v1 submitted 22 July, 2020;
originally announced July 2020.
