1,721,016 research outputs found
Relational Concept Bottleneck Models
No full textThe design of interpretable deep learning models working in relational domains poses an open challenge: interpretable deep learning methods, such as Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs), are not designed to solve relational problems, while relational deep learning models, such as Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), are not as interpretable as CBMs. To overcome these limitations, we propose Relational Concept Bottleneck Models (R-CBMs), a family of relational deep learning methods providing interpretable task predictions. As special cases, we show that R-CBMs are capable of both representing standard CBMs and message-passing GNNs. To evaluate the effectiveness and versatility of these models, we designed a class of experimental problems, ranging from image classification to link prediction in knowledge graphs. In particular we show that R-CBMs (i) match generalization performance of existing relational black-boxes, (ii) support the generation of quantified concept-based explanations, (iii) effectively respond to test-time interventions, and (iv) withstand demanding settings including out-of-distribution scenarios, limited training data regimes, and scarce concept supervisions
Entropy-Based Logic Explanations of Neural Networks
No full textExplainable artificial intelligence has rapidly emerged since lawmakers have started requiring interpretable models for safety-critical domains. Concept-based neural networks have arisen as explainable-by-design methods as they leverage human-understandable symbols (i.e. concepts) to predict class memberships. However, most of these approaches focus on the identification of the most relevant concepts but do not provide concise, formal explanations of how such concepts are leveraged by the classifier to make predictions. In this paper, we propose a novel end-to-end differentiable approach enabling the extraction of logic explanations from neural networks using the formalism of First-Order Logic. The method relies on an entropy-based criterion which automatically identifies the most relevant concepts. We consider four different case studies to demonstrate that: (i) this entropy-based criterion enables the distillation of concise logic explanations in safety-critical domains from clinical data to computer vision; (ii) the proposed approach outperforms state-of-the-art white-box models in terms of classification accuracy and matches black box performances
Linearly-interpretable concept embedding models for text analysis
Full text linkDespite their success, Large-Language Models (LLMs) still face criticism due to their lack of interpretability. Traditional post-hoc interpretation methods, based on attention and gradient-based analysis, offer limited insights as they only approximate the model's decision-making processes and have been proved to be unreliable. For this reason, Concept-Bottleneck Models (CBMs) have been lately proposed in the textual field to provide interpretable predictions based on human-understandable concepts. However, CBMs still exhibit several limitations due to their architectural constraints limiting their expressivity, to the absence of task-interpretability when employing non-linear task predictors and for requiring extensive annotations that are impractical for real-world text data. In this paper, we address these challenges by proposing a novel Linearly Interpretable Concept Embedding Model (LICEM) going beyond the current accuracy-interpretability trade-off. LICEMs classification accuracy is better than existing interpretable models and matches black-box ones. We show that the explanations provided by our models are more intervenable and causally consistent with respect to existing solutions. Finally, we show that LICEMs can be trained without requiring any concept supervision, as concepts can be automatically predicted when using an LLM backbone
Interpretable Graph Networks Formulate Universal Algebra Conjectures
Full text linkThe rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) recently empowered researchers to investigate hard mathematical problems which eluded traditional approaches for decades. Yet, the use of AI in Universal Algebra (UA)-one of the fields laying the foundations of modern mathematics-is still completely unexplored. This work proposes the first use of AI to investigate UA's conjectures with an equivalent equational and topological characterization. While topological representations would enable the analysis of such properties using graph neural networks, the limited transparency and brittle explainability of these models hinder their straightforward use to empirically validate existing conjectures or to formulate new ones. To bridge these gaps, we propose a general algorithm generating AI-ready datasets based on UA's conjectures, and introduce a novel neural layer to build fully interpretable graph networks. The results of our experiments demonstrate that interpretable graph networks: (i) enhance interpretability without sacrificing task accuracy, (ii) strongly generalize when predicting universal algebra's properties, (iii) generate simple explanations that empirically validate existing conjectures, and (iv) identify subgraphs suggesting the formulation of novel conjectures
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
