Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Counterfactuals and Causability in Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications
18
Zitationen
5
Autoren
2021
Jahr
Abstract
There has been a growing interest in model-agnostic methods that can make deep learning models more transparent and explainable to a user. Some researchers recently argued that for a machine to achieve a certain degree of human-level explainability, this machine needs to provide human causally understandable explanations, also known as causability. A specific class of algorithms that have the potential to provide causability are counterfactuals. This paper presents an in-depth systematic review of the diverse existing body of literature on counterfactuals and causability for explainable artificial intelligence. We performed an LDA topic modelling analysis under a PRISMA framework to find the most relevant literature articles. This analysis resulted in a novel taxonomy that considers the grounding theories of the surveyed algorithms, together with their underlying properties and applications in real-world data. This research suggests that current model-agnostic counterfactual algorithms for explainable AI are not grounded on a causal theoretical formalism and, consequently, cannot promote causability to a human decision-maker. Our findings suggest that the explanations derived from major algorithms in the literature provide spurious correlations rather than cause/effects relationships, leading to sub-optimal, erroneous or even biased explanations. This paper also advances the literature with new directions and challenges on promoting causability in model-agnostic approaches for explainable artificial intelligence.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-Based Localization
2017 · 20.311 Zit.
Generative Adversarial Nets
2023 · 19.841 Zit.
Visualizing and Understanding Convolutional Networks
2014 · 15.238 Zit.
"Why Should I Trust You?"
2016 · 14.210 Zit.
On a Method to Measure Supervised Multiclass Model’s Interpretability: Application to Degradation Diagnosis (Short Paper)
2024 · 13.104 Zit.