Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

EDUCE: Explaining model Decisions through Unsupervised Concepts Extraction

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1905.11852 v2 pith:FCNBRD2X submitted 2019-05-28 cs.LG stat.ML

classification cs.LGstat.ML
keywords conceptsmodelpredictionpresencetextconceptinputtasks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Providing explanations along with predictions is crucial in some text processing tasks. Therefore, we propose a new self-interpretable model that performs output prediction and simultaneously provides an explanation in terms of the presence of particular concepts in the input. To do so, our model's prediction relies solely on a low-dimensional binary representation of the input, where each feature denotes the presence or absence of concepts. The presence of a concept is decided from an excerpt i.e. a small sequence of consecutive words in the text. Relevant concepts for the prediction task at hand are automatically defined by our model, avoiding the need for concept-level annotations. To ease interpretability, we enforce that for each concept, the corresponding excerpts share similar semantics and are differentiable from each others. We experimentally demonstrate the relevance of our approach on text classification and multi-sentiment analysis tasks.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Regulation of Language Models With Interpretability Will Likely Result In A Performance Trade-Off

    cs.LG 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Forcing an LLM to classify using only human-specified legal concepts costs about 7.34% accuracy, but can speed up human decision-making despite the loss.

Pith tools