Score breakdown

Why Should I Trust You? Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier

paper-0085 · paper · 2016

Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, Carlos Guestrin

LIME; model-agnostic local explanation.

Abstract

Despite widespread adoption in NLP, machine learning models remain mostly black boxes. Understanding the reasons behind predictions is, however, quite important in assessing trust in a model. Trust is fundamental if one plans to take action based on a prediction, or when choosing whether or not to deploy a new model. In this work, we describe LIME, a novel explanation technique that explains the predictions of any classifier in an interpretable and faithful manner. We further present a method to explain models by presenting representative individual predictions and their explanations in a non-redundant manner. We propose a demonstration of these ideas on different NLP tasks such as document classification, politeness detection, and sentiment analysis, with classifiers like neural networks and SVMs. The user interactions include explanations of free-form text, challenging users to identify the better classifier from a pair, and perform basic feature engineering to improve the classifiers. [OpenAlex]

Academic, score -0.1741

MetricStatusValueNorm.WeightContributionSourceConfidenceLicenseProvenance
citation_countpresent5176.00.0232950.50.011647OpenAlexmediumOpenAlex, CC0 metadatalink
library_holdingsmissingrecorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed−0.1recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed
readership_persistencepresent12.00.7857140.050.039286OpenAlexlowOpenAlex, CC0 metadatalink
syllabus_adoptionsmissingrecorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed−0.125recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed

Broad Influence, score 0.1189

MetricStatusValueNorm.WeightContributionSourceConfidenceLicenseProvenance
citation_countpresent5176.00.0232950.20.004659OpenAlexmediumOpenAlex, CC0 metadatalink
library_holdingsmissingrecorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed−0.125recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed
readership_persistencepresent12.00.7857140.40.314286OpenAlexlowOpenAlex, CC0 metadatalink
syllabus_adoptionsmissingrecorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed−0.075recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed

Governance Practitioner, score -0.2406

MetricStatusValueNorm.WeightContributionSourceConfidenceLicenseProvenance
citation_countpresent5176.00.0232950.250.005824OpenAlexmediumOpenAlex, CC0 metadatalink
library_holdingsmissingrecorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed−0.15recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed
readership_persistencepresent12.00.7857140.10.078571OpenAlexlowOpenAlex, CC0 metadatalink
syllabus_adoptionsmissingrecorded as missing, penalized by rule, never imputed−0.175recorded as missing; penalized by rule, never imputed

A rank is not a verdict on intrinsic worth. It is a transparent output of declared evidence, weights, and missing-data rules at a specific release date.

Disagree with this rank or a number? Challenge it with your evidence. Every challenge gets a public identifier and a published resolution.