OpenXAI: Towards a Transparent Evaluation of Post hoc Model Explanations

被引:0
|
作者
Agarwal, Chirag [1 ,2 ]
Krishna, Satyapriya [1 ]
Saxena, Eshika [1 ]
Pawelczyk, Martin [3 ]
Johnson, Nari [4 ]
Puri, Isha [1 ]
Zitnik, Marinka [1 ]
Lakkaraju, Himabindu [1 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
[2] Adobe, San Jose, CA 95110 USA
[3] Univ Tubingen, Tubingen, Germany
[4] Carnegie Mellon Univ, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA
来源
ADVANCES IN NEURAL INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEMS 35 (NEURIPS 2022) | 2022年
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
While several types of post hoc explanation methods have been proposed in recent literature, there is very little work on systematically benchmarking these methods. Here, we introduce OpenXAI, a comprehensive and extensible open-source framework for evaluating and benchmarking post hoc explanation methods. OpenXAI comprises of the following key components: (i) a flexible synthetic data generator and a collection of diverse real-world datasets, pre-trained models, and state-of-the-art feature attribution methods, (ii) open-source implementations of twenty-two quantitative metrics for evaluating faithfulness, stability (robustness), and fairness of explanation methods, and (iii) the first ever public XAI leaderboards to readily compare several explanation methods across a wide variety of metrics, models, and datasets. OpenXAI is easily extensible, as users can readily evaluate custom explanation methods and incorporate them into our leaderboards. Overall, OpenXAI provides an automated end-to-end pipeline that not only simplifies and standardizes the evaluation of post hoc explanation methods, but also promotes transparency and reproducibility in benchmarking these methods. While the first release of OpenXAI supports only tabular datasets, the explanation methods and metrics that we consider are general enough to be applicable to other data modalities. OpenXAI datasets and data loaders, implementations of state-of-the-art explanation methods and evaluation metrics, as well as leaderboards are publicly available at https://open- xai.github.io/. OpenXAI will be regularly updated to incorporate text and image datasets, other new metrics and explanation methods, and welcomes inputs from the community.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Through the looking glass: evaluating post hoc explanations using transparent models
    Velmurugan, Mythreyi
    Ouyang, Chun
    Sindhgatta, Renuka
    Moreira, Catarina
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DATA SCIENCE AND ANALYTICS, 2023,
  • [2] A Quantitative Evaluation of Global, Rule-Based Explanations of Post-Hoc, Model Agnostic Methods
    Vilone, Giulia
    Longo, Luca
    FRONTIERS IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2021, 4
  • [3] Towards Transparent Robotic Planning via Contrastive Explanations
    Chen, Shenghui
    Boggess, Kayla
    Feng, Lu
    2020 IEEE/RSJ INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON INTELLIGENT ROBOTS AND SYSTEMS (IROS), 2020, : 6593 - 6598
  • [4] When are Post-hoc Conceptual Explanations Identifiable?
    Leemann, Tobias
    Kirchhof, Michael
    Rong, Yao
    Kasneci, Enkelejda
    Kasneci, Gjergji
    UNCERTAINTY IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2023, 216 : 1207 - 1218
  • [5] Post Hoc Explanations and Consumer Response to Algorithmic Decisions
    Mourali, Mehdi
    Novakowski, Dallas
    Pogacar, Ruth
    Brigden, Neil
    ADVANCES IN CONSUMER RESEARCH, VOL L, ACR 2022, 2022, : 457 - 457
  • [6] Reliable Post hoc Explanations: Modeling Uncertainty in Explainability
    Slack, Dylan
    Hilgard, Sophie
    Singh, Sameer
    Lakkaraju, Himabindu
    ADVANCES IN NEURAL INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEMS 34 (NEURIPS 2021), 2021, 34
  • [7] Generating Recommendations with Post-Hoc Explanations for Citizen Science
    Ben Zaken, Daniel
    Shani, Guy
    Segal, Avi
    Cavalier, Darlene
    Gal, Kobi
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 30TH ACM CONFERENCE ON USER MODELING, ADAPTATION AND PERSONALIZATION, UMAP 2022, 2022, : 69 - 78
  • [8] An Empirical Comparison of Interpretable Models to Post-Hoc Explanations
    Mahya, Parisa
    Fuernkranz, Johannes
    AI, 2023, 4 (02) : 426 - 436
  • [9] Post hoc explanations improve consumer responses to algorithmic decisions
    Mourali, Mehdi
    Novakowski, Dallas
    Pogacar, Ruth
    Brigden, Neil
    JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH, 2025, 186
  • [10] The Dangers of Post-hoc Interpretability: Unjustified Counterfactual Explanations
    Laugel, Thibault
    Lesot, Marie-Jeanne
    Marsala, Christophe
    Renard, Xavier
    Detyniecki, Marcin
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE TWENTY-EIGHTH INTERNATIONAL JOINT CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2019, : 2801 - 2807