Towards A Rigorous Science of Interpretable Machine Learning
February 28, 2017 Β· Declared Dead Β· + Add venue
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Finale Doshi-Velez, Been Kim
arXiv ID
1702.08608
Category
stat.ML: Machine Learning (Stat)
Cross-listed
cs.AI,
cs.LG
Citations
4.7K
Last Checked
1 month ago
Abstract
As machine learning systems become ubiquitous, there has been a surge of interest in interpretable machine learning: systems that provide explanation for their outputs. These explanations are often used to qualitatively assess other criteria such as safety or non-discrimination. However, despite the interest in interpretability, there is very little consensus on what interpretable machine learning is and how it should be measured. In this position paper, we first define interpretability and describe when interpretability is needed (and when it is not). Next, we suggest a taxonomy for rigorous evaluation and expose open questions towards a more rigorous science of interpretable machine learning.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Machine Learning (Stat)
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Network
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Layer Normalization
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Learning with Differential Privacy
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted