Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Contrastive Explanations #14

Open
TobiasGoerke opened this issue Jul 26, 2019 · 1 comment
Open

Contrastive Explanations #14

TobiasGoerke opened this issue Jul 26, 2019 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request help wanted Extra attention is needed

Comments

@TobiasGoerke
Copy link
Collaborator

Anchors is able to explain any model's decision (e.g. for a label it predicted). However, the explained label does not necessarily have to equal the value the model did actually predict but can be freely chosen.

So, we can force the model to explain a decision it has not made. This would reveil its motivation to classify an instance differently - even though it didn't.

I'd like to start a discussion about how this information could be used.

Surely, visualization is one use-case. Showing some sort of matrix for an explanations that displays which features voted for and which voted against the decision would be possible and helpful.
Any more ideas?

@TobiasGoerke TobiasGoerke added enhancement New feature or request help wanted Extra attention is needed labels Jul 26, 2019
@fkoehne
Copy link
Contributor

fkoehne commented Jul 26, 2019

A new aspect on the upcoming master thesis? Basically I would want both approachs with an integrated conclusion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants