Predictive systems based on high-dimensional behavioral and textual data have serious comprehensibility and transparency issues: linear models require investigating thousands of coefficients, while the opaqueness of nonlinear models makes things worse. Counterfactual explanations are becoming increasingly popular for generating insight into model predictions. This study aligns the recently proposed linear interpretable model-agnostic explainer and Shapley additive explanations with the notion of counterfactual explanations, and empirically compares the effectiveness and efficiency of these novel algorithms against a model-agnostic heuristic search algorithm for finding evidence counterfactuals using 13 behavioral and textual data sets. We show that different search methods have different strengths, and importantly, that there is much room for future research.

Every step we take in the digital world leaves behind a record of our behavior; a digital footprint. Research has suggested that algorithms can translate these digital footprints into accurate estimates of psychological characteristics, including personality traits, mental health or intelligence. The mechanisms by which AI generates these insights, however, often remain opaque. In this paper, we show how Explainable AI (XAI) can help domain experts and data subjects validate, question, and improve models that classify psychological traits from digital footprints. We elaborate on two popular XAI methods (rule extraction and counterfactual explanations) in the context of Big Five personality predictions (traits and facets) from financial transactions data (N = 6408). First, we demonstrate how global rule extraction sheds light on the spending patterns identified by the model as most predictive for personality, and discuss how these rules can be used to explain, validate, and improve the model. Second, we implement local rule extraction to show that individuals are assigned to personality classes because of their unique financial behavior, and there exists a positive link between the model’s prediction confidence and the number of features that contributed to the prediction. Our experiments highlight the importance of both global and local XAI methods. By better understanding how predictive models work in general as well as how they derive an outcome for a particular person, XAI promotes accountability in a world in which AI impacts the lives of billions of people around the world.

No abstract

The outstanding performance of deep learning (DL) for computer vision and natural language processing has fueled increased interest in applying these algorithms more broadly in both research and practice. This study investigates the application of DL techniques to classification of large sparse behavioral data-which has become ubiquitous in the age of big data collection. We report on an extensive search through DL architecture variants and compare the predictive performance of DL with that of carefully regularized logistic regression (LR), which previously (and repeatedly) has been found to be the most accurate machine learning technique generally for sparse behavioral data. At a high level, we demonstrate that by following recommendations from the literature, researchers and practitioners who are not DL experts can achieve world-class performance using DL. More specifically, we report several findings. As a main result, applying DL on 39 big sparse behavioral classification tasks demonstrates a significant performance improvement compared with LR. A follow-up result suggests that if one were to choose the best shallow technique (rather than just LR), there still would often be an improvement from using DL, but that in this case the magnitude of the improvement might not justify the high cost. Investigating when DL performs better, we find that worse performance is obtained for data sets with low signal-from-noise separability-in line with prior results comparing linear and nonlinear classifiers. Exploring why the deep architectures work well, we show that using the first-layer features learned by DL yields better generalization performance for a linear model than do unsupervised feature-reduction methods (e.g., singular-value decomposition). However, to do well enough to beat well-regularized LR with the original sparse representation, more layers from the deep distributed architecture are needed. With respect to interpreting how deep models come to their decisions, we demonstrate how the neurons on the lowest layer of the deep architecture capture nuances from the raw fine-grained features and allow intuitive interpretation. Looking forward, we propose the use of instance-level counterfactual explanations to gain insight into why deep models classify individual data instances the way they do.

No abstract