-
Position Paper: Bridging the Gap Between Machine Learning and Sensitivity Analysis
Authors:
Christian A. Scholbeck,
Julia Moosbauer,
Giuseppe Casalicchio,
Hoshin Gupta,
Bernd Bischl,
Christian Heumann
Abstract:
We argue that interpretations of machine learning (ML) models or the model-building process can bee seen as a form of sensitivity analysis (SA), a general methodology used to explain complex systems in many fields such as environmental modeling, engineering, or economics. We address both researchers and practitioners, calling attention to the benefits of a unified SA-based view of explanations in…
▽ More
We argue that interpretations of machine learning (ML) models or the model-building process can bee seen as a form of sensitivity analysis (SA), a general methodology used to explain complex systems in many fields such as environmental modeling, engineering, or economics. We address both researchers and practitioners, calling attention to the benefits of a unified SA-based view of explanations in ML and the necessity to fully credit related work. We bridge the gap between both fields by formally describing how (a) the ML process is a system suitable for SA, (b) how existing ML interpretation methods relate to this perspective, and (c) how other SA techniques could be applied to ML.
△ Less
Submitted 20 December, 2023;
originally announced December 2023.
-
fmeffects: An R Package for Forward Marginal Effects
Authors:
Holger Löwe,
Christian A. Scholbeck,
Christian Heumann,
Bernd Bischl,
Giuseppe Casalicchio
Abstract:
Forward marginal effects (FMEs) have recently been introduced as a versatile and effective model-agnostic interpretation method. They provide comprehensible and actionable model explanations in the form of: If we change $x$ by an amount $h$, what is the change in predicted outcome $\widehat{y}$? We present the R package fmeffects, the first software implementation of FMEs. The relevant theoretical…
▽ More
Forward marginal effects (FMEs) have recently been introduced as a versatile and effective model-agnostic interpretation method. They provide comprehensible and actionable model explanations in the form of: If we change $x$ by an amount $h$, what is the change in predicted outcome $\widehat{y}$? We present the R package fmeffects, the first software implementation of FMEs. The relevant theoretical background, package functionality and handling, as well as the software design and options for future extensions are discussed in this paper.
△ Less
Submitted 3 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Algorithm-Agnostic Interpretations for Clustering
Authors:
Christian A. Scholbeck,
Henri Funk,
Giuseppe Casalicchio
Abstract:
A clustering outcome for high-dimensional data is typically interpreted via post-processing, involving dimension reduction and subsequent visualization. This destroys the meaning of the data and obfuscates interpretations. We propose algorithm-agnostic interpretation methods to explain clustering outcomes in reduced dimensions while preserving the integrity of the data. The permutation feature imp…
▽ More
A clustering outcome for high-dimensional data is typically interpreted via post-processing, involving dimension reduction and subsequent visualization. This destroys the meaning of the data and obfuscates interpretations. We propose algorithm-agnostic interpretation methods to explain clustering outcomes in reduced dimensions while preserving the integrity of the data. The permutation feature importance for clustering represents a general framework based on shuffling feature values and measuring changes in cluster assignments through custom score functions. The individual conditional expectation for clustering indicates observation-wise changes in the cluster assignment due to changes in the data. The partial dependence for clustering evaluates average changes in cluster assignments for the entire feature space. All methods can be used with any clustering algorithm able to reassign instances through soft or hard labels. In contrast to common post-processing methods such as principal component analysis, the introduced methods maintain the original structure of the features.
△ Less
Submitted 21 September, 2022;
originally announced September 2022.
-
Marginal Effects for Non-Linear Prediction Functions
Authors:
Christian A. Scholbeck,
Giuseppe Casalicchio,
Christoph Molnar,
Bernd Bischl,
Christian Heumann
Abstract:
Beta coefficients for linear regression models represent the ideal form of an interpretable feature effect. However, for non-linear models and especially generalized linear models, the estimated coefficients cannot be interpreted as a direct feature effect on the predicted outcome. Hence, marginal effects are typically used as approximations for feature effects, either in the shape of derivatives…
▽ More
Beta coefficients for linear regression models represent the ideal form of an interpretable feature effect. However, for non-linear models and especially generalized linear models, the estimated coefficients cannot be interpreted as a direct feature effect on the predicted outcome. Hence, marginal effects are typically used as approximations for feature effects, either in the shape of derivatives of the prediction function or forward differences in prediction due to a change in a feature value. While marginal effects are commonly used in many scientific fields, they have not yet been adopted as a model-agnostic interpretation method for machine learning models. This may stem from their inflexibility as a univariate feature effect and their inability to deal with the non-linearities found in black box models. We introduce a new class of marginal effects termed forward marginal effects. We argue to abandon derivatives in favor of better-interpretable forward differences. Furthermore, we generalize marginal effects based on forward differences to multivariate changes in feature values. To account for the non-linearity of prediction functions, we introduce a non-linearity measure for marginal effects. We argue against summarizing feature effects of a non-linear prediction function in a single metric such as the average marginal effect. Instead, we propose to partition the feature space to compute conditional average marginal effects on feature subspaces, which serve as conditional feature effect estimates.
△ Less
Submitted 21 January, 2022;
originally announced January 2022.
-
General Pitfalls of Model-Agnostic Interpretation Methods for Machine Learning Models
Authors:
Christoph Molnar,
Gunnar König,
Julia Herbinger,
Timo Freiesleben,
Susanne Dandl,
Christian A. Scholbeck,
Giuseppe Casalicchio,
Moritz Grosse-Wentrup,
Bernd Bischl
Abstract:
An increasing number of model-agnostic interpretation techniques for machine learning (ML) models such as partial dependence plots (PDP), permutation feature importance (PFI) and Shapley values provide insightful model interpretations, but can lead to wrong conclusions if applied incorrectly. We highlight many general pitfalls of ML model interpretation, such as using interpretation techniques in…
▽ More
An increasing number of model-agnostic interpretation techniques for machine learning (ML) models such as partial dependence plots (PDP), permutation feature importance (PFI) and Shapley values provide insightful model interpretations, but can lead to wrong conclusions if applied incorrectly. We highlight many general pitfalls of ML model interpretation, such as using interpretation techniques in the wrong context, interpreting models that do not generalize well, ignoring feature dependencies, interactions, uncertainty estimates and issues in high-dimensional settings, or making unjustified causal interpretations, and illustrate them with examples. We focus on pitfalls for global methods that describe the average model behavior, but many pitfalls also apply to local methods that explain individual predictions. Our paper addresses ML practitioners by raising awareness of pitfalls and identifying solutions for correct model interpretation, but also addresses ML researchers by discussing open issues for further research.
△ Less
Submitted 17 August, 2021; v1 submitted 8 July, 2020;
originally announced July 2020.
-
Sampling, Intervention, Prediction, Aggregation: A Generalized Framework for Model-Agnostic Interpretations
Authors:
Christian A. Scholbeck,
Christoph Molnar,
Christian Heumann,
Bernd Bischl,
Giuseppe Casalicchio
Abstract:
Model-agnostic interpretation techniques allow us to explain the behavior of any predictive model. Due to different notations and terminology, it is difficult to see how they are related. A unified view on these methods has been missing. We present the generalized SIPA (sampling, intervention, prediction, aggregation) framework of work stages for model-agnostic interpretations and demonstrate how…
▽ More
Model-agnostic interpretation techniques allow us to explain the behavior of any predictive model. Due to different notations and terminology, it is difficult to see how they are related. A unified view on these methods has been missing. We present the generalized SIPA (sampling, intervention, prediction, aggregation) framework of work stages for model-agnostic interpretations and demonstrate how several prominent methods for feature effects can be embedded into the proposed framework. Furthermore, we extend the framework to feature importance computations by pointing out how variance-based and performance-based importance measures are based on the same work stages. The SIPA framework reduces the diverse set of model-agnostic techniques to a single methodology and establishes a common terminology to discuss them in future work.
△ Less
Submitted 13 February, 2020; v1 submitted 8 April, 2019;
originally announced April 2019.
