skip to main content
10.1145/3375627.3375812acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaiesConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

CERTIFAI: A Common Framework to Provide Explanations and Analyse the Fairness and Robustness of Black-box Models

Published: 07 February 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Concerns within the machine learning community and external pressures from regulators over the vulnerabilities of machine learning algorithms have spurred on the fields of explainability, robustness, and fairness. Often, issues in explainability, robustness, and fairness are confined to their specific sub-fields and few tools exist for model developers to use to simultaneously build their modeling pipelines in a transparent, accountable, and fair way. This can lead to a bottleneck on the model developer's side as they must juggle multiple methods to evaluate their algorithms. In this paper, we present a single framework for analyzing the robustness, fairness, and explainability of a classifier. The framework, which is based on the generation of counterfactual explanations through a custom genetic algorithm, is flexible, model-agnostic, and does not require access to model internals. The framework allows the user to calculate robustness and fairness scores for individual models and generate explanations for individual predictions which provide a means for actionable recourse (changes to an input to help get a desired outcome). This is the first time that a unified tool has been developed to address three key issues pertaining towards building a responsible artificial intelligence system.

References

[1]
Naveed Akhtar and Ajmal Mian. 2018. Threat of adversarial attacks on deep learning in computer vision: A survey. IEEE Access 6 (2018), 14410--14430.
[2]
Sebastian Bach, Alexander Binder, Gregoire Montavon, Frederick Klauschen, Klaus-Robert Muller, and Wojciech Samek. 2015. On pixel-wise explanations for non-linear classifier decisions by layer-wise relevance propagation. PloS one 10, 7 (2015), e0130140.
[3]
Rachel KE Bellamy, Kuntal Dey, Michael Hind, Samuel C Hoffman, Stephanie Houde, Kalapriya Kannan, Pranay Lohia, Jacquelyn Martino, Sameep Mehta, Aleksandra Mojsilovic, et al. 2018. Ai fairness 360: An extensible toolkit for detecting, understanding, and mitigating unwanted algorithmic bias. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.01943 (2018).
[4]
Rachel K. E. Bellamy, Kuntal Dey, Michael Hind, Samuel C. Hoffman, Stephanie Houde, Kalapriya Kannan, Pranay Lohia, Jacquelyn Martino, Sameep Mehta, Aleksandra Mojsilovic, Seema Nagar, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, John Richards, Diptikalyan Saha, Prasanna Sattigeri, Moninder Singh, Kush R. Varshney, and Yunfeng Zhang. 2018. AI Fairness 360: An Extensible Toolkit for Detecting, Understanding, and Mitigating Unwanted Algorithmic Bias. https: //arxiv.org/abs/1810.01943
[5]
Reuben Binns. 2017. Fairness in machine learning: Lessons from political philosophy. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.03586 (2017).
[6]
Nicholas Carlini and David Wagner. 2017. Towards evaluating the robustness of neural networks. In 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 39--57.
[7]
Tianqi Chen and Carlos Guestrin. 2016. XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 785--794. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785
[8]
Google. 2019. Google what-if tool.
[9]
Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Salvatore Ruggieri, Dino Pedreschi, Franco Turini, and Fosca Giannotti. 2018. Local rule-based explanations of black box decision systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.10820 (2018).
[10]
Riccardo Guidotti, Anna Monreale, Salvatore Ruggieri, Franco Turini, Fosca Giannotti, and Dino Pedreschi. 2018. A survey of methods for explaining black box models. ACM computing surveys (CSUR) 51, 5 (2018), 93.
[11]
Anh Nguyen, Jason Yosinski, and Jeff Clune. 2015. Deep neural networks are easily fooled: High confidence predictions for unrecognizable images. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 427--436.
[12]
Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. 2016. Why should i trust you?: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining. ACM, 1135--1144.
[13]
Chris Russell. 2019. Efficient Search for Diverse Coherent Explanations. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. ACM, 10--19.
[14]
Berk Ustun, Alexander Spangher, and Yang Liu. 2019. Actionable Recourse in Linear Classification. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. ACM, 10--19.
[15]
Sandra Wachter, Brent Mittelstadt, and Chris Russell. 2017. Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: automated decisions and the GDPR. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 31, 2 (2017), 2018.
[16]
ZhouWang, Alan C Bovik, and Ligang Lu. 2002. Why is image quality assessment so difficult?. In Proceedings of International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (CASSP. IEEE, IV--3313.
[17]
ZhouWang, Eero P Simoncelli, and Alan C Bovik. 2003. Multiscale structural similarity for image quality assessment. In The Thrity-Seventh Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems & Computers, 2003, Vol. 2. Ieee, 1398--1402.
[18]
Tsui-Wei Weng, Huan Zhang, Pin-Yu Chen, Jinfeng Yi, Dong Su, Yupeng Gao, Cho-Jui Hsieh, and Luca Daniel. 2018. Evaluating the robustness of neural networks: An extreme value theory approach. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.10578 (2018).

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)The Role of Humanization and Robustness of Large Language Models in Conversational Artificial Intelligence for Individuals With Depression: A Critical AnalysisJMIR Mental Health10.2196/5656911(e56569-e56569)Online publication date: 2-Jul-2024
  • (2024)FinTech, Regulation, and Cybercrime: Opportunities Arising From New TechnologiesSSRN Electronic Journal10.2139/ssrn.4620106Online publication date: 2024
  • (2024)An Analysis of the Ingredients for Learning Interpretable Symbolic Regression Models with Human-in-the-loop and Genetic ProgrammingACM Transactions on Evolutionary Learning and Optimization10.1145/36436884:1(1-30)Online publication date: 23-Feb-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. CERTIFAI: A Common Framework to Provide Explanations and Analyse the Fairness and Robustness of Black-box Models

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image ACM Conferences
        AIES '20: Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
        February 2020
        439 pages
        ISBN:9781450371100
        DOI:10.1145/3375627
        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Sponsors

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        Published: 07 February 2020

        Permissions

        Request permissions for this article.

        Check for updates

        Author Tags

        1. explainability
        2. fairness
        3. machine learning
        4. responsible artificial intelligence
        5. robust-ness

        Qualifiers

        • Research-article

        Conference

        AIES '20
        Sponsor:

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate 61 of 162 submissions, 38%

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)222
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)18
        Reflects downloads up to 14 Sep 2024

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all

        View Options

        Get Access

        Login options

        View options

        PDF

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Media

        Figures

        Other

        Tables

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media