Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Evaluation Metrics for Symbolic Knowledge Extracted from Machine Learning Black Boxes: A Discussion Paper

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 2211.00238 v1 pith:EJGH2MUN submitted 2022-11-01 cs.AI cs.LG

classification cs.AIcs.LG
keywords knowledgeopaquereadabilityevaluationextractedissuesmetricrepresentations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

As opaque decision systems are being increasingly adopted in almost any application field, issues about their lack of transparency and human readability are a concrete concern for end-users. Amongst existing proposals to associate human-interpretable knowledge with accurate predictions provided by opaque models, there are rule extraction techniques, capable of extracting symbolic knowledge out of an opaque model. However, how to assess the level of readability of the extracted knowledge quantitatively is still an open issue. Finding such a metric would be the key, for instance, to enable automatic comparison between a set of different knowledge representations, paving the way for the development of parameter autotuning algorithms for knowledge extractors. In this paper we discuss the need for such a metric as well as the criticalities of readability assessment and evaluation, taking into account the most common knowledge representations while highlighting the most puzzling issues.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools