Evaluating Tree Explanation Methods for Anomaly Reasoning: A Case Study of SHAP TreeExplainer and TreeInterpreter

October 13, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› International Conference on Conceptual Modeling

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Pulkit Sharma, Shezan Rohinton Mirzan, Apurva Bhandari, Anish Pimpley, Abhiram Eswaran, Soundar Srinivasan, Liqun Shao arXiv ID 2010.06734 Category cs.AI: Artificial Intelligence Cross-listed cs.GT Citations 15 Venue International Conference on Conceptual Modeling Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
Understanding predictions made by Machine Learning models is critical in many applications. In this work, we investigate the performance of two methods for explaining tree-based models- Tree Interpreter (TI) and SHapley Additive exPlanations TreeExplainer (SHAP-TE). Using a case study on detecting anomalies in job runtimes of applications that utilize cloud-computing platforms, we compare these approaches using a variety of metrics, including computation time, significance of attribution value, and explanation accuracy. We find that, although the SHAP-TE offers consistency guarantees over TI, at the cost of increased computation, consistency does not necessarily improve the explanation performance in our case study.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Artificial Intelligence

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted