Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
102 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Synthetic Benchmarks for Scientific Research in Explainable Machine Learning (2106.12543v4)

Published 23 Jun 2021 in cs.LG, cs.AI, and stat.ML

Abstract: As machine learning models grow more complex and their applications become more high-stakes, tools for explaining model predictions have become increasingly important. This has spurred a flurry of research in model explainability and has given rise to feature attribution methods such as LIME and SHAP. Despite their widespread use, evaluating and comparing different feature attribution methods remains challenging: evaluations ideally require human studies, and empirical evaluation metrics are often data-intensive or computationally prohibitive on real-world datasets. In this work, we address this issue by releasing XAI-Bench: a suite of synthetic datasets along with a library for benchmarking feature attribution algorithms. Unlike real-world datasets, synthetic datasets allow the efficient computation of conditional expected values that are needed to evaluate ground-truth Shapley values and other metrics. The synthetic datasets we release offer a wide variety of parameters that can be configured to simulate real-world data. We demonstrate the power of our library by benchmarking popular explainability techniques across several evaluation metrics and across a variety of settings. The versatility and efficiency of our library will help researchers bring their explainability methods from development to deployment. Our code is available at https://github.com/abacusai/xai-bench.

View on arXiv
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Yang Liu (2253 papers)
  2. Sujay Khandagale (5 papers)
  3. Colin White (34 papers)
  4. Willie Neiswanger (68 papers)
Citations (59)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

Synthetic Benchmarks for Scientific Research in Explainable Machine Learning

The document discusses a critical advancement in the field of explainable machine learning (XAI) by introducing a benchmarking library named XAI-Bench. As machine learning models become more sophisticated and are applied in high-stakes situations, explaining their decisions becomes increasingly indispensable. Tools like LIME and SHAP are popular for feature attribution, providing insights into how models make decisions. However, the effective evaluation and comparison of various feature attribution methods pose significant challenges, often necessitating human subject studies or relying on empirical metrics that are computationally demanding on real-world data.

Contribution and Methodology

The paper addresses these challenges by presenting a suite of synthetic datasets specifically designed for benchmarking feature attribution algorithms. Synthetic datasets offer crucial advantages compared to real-world datasets, notably the availability of known ground-truth distributions which allow the exact computation of conditional expectations essential in evaluating Shapley values and other metrics. In this vein, XAI-Bench enables efficient evaluations by simulating real-world data conditions through various configurable parameters within the synthetic datasets.

The paper showcases these advancements by benchmarking several established explainability techniques—such as SHAP, LIME, MAPLE, SHAPR, L2X, breakDown, and RANDOM—against multiple evaluation metrics across a range of settings. This library facilitates rapid transitioning from the development phase to deployment for explainability methods.

Key Findings and Implications

The analytical framework of the XAI-Bench library identifies important findings about the performance of different explainability techniques. Notably, techniques like SHAPR, designed to handle feature dependencies, are demonstrated to outperform traditional methods like SHAP in scenarios with high feature correlation. MAPLE showed consistent performance across different metrics due to its hybrid approach. These insights are crucial for researchers developing new methods, as they highlight the strengths and weaknesses of existing approaches dependent on dataset characteristics.

The paper anticipates the practical and theoretical implications of such research by speculating on the future of AI development. The library is likely to promote the refinement and reliability of model explainability techniques, which is increasingly vital in ensuring unbiased and trustworthy AI applications.

Future Directions

Moving forward, the library sets a robust foundation for further contributions from the research community, with open invitations to expand its use for a broad range of scenarios. It advocates for continuous improvement of explainability techniques, reinforcing their application in diverse, real-world situations beyond the development setting.

Such libraries play an integral role in promoting responsible AI practices, not just by enhancing the quality of explanations provided by models but by catalyzing discussions around the ethical deployment of AI technologies.

In summary, the XAI-Bench framework offers a pioneering approach to mitigating the complexities inherent in evaluating machine learning explainability techniques, creating significant opportunities for advancement in the field while prioritizing efficiency, usability, and accuracy.