Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv subjects

Finale Doshi-Velez

Publications and source records attributed to Finale Doshi-Velez.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

On the Effective Horizon of Inverse Reinforcement Learning

Inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) algorithms often rely on (forward) reinforcement learning or planning, over a given time horizon, to compute an approximately optimal policy for a hypothesized reward function; they then match this policy with expert demonstrations. The time horizon plays a critical role in determining both the accuracy of reward estimates and the computational efficiency of IRL algorithms. Interestingly, an *effective time horizon* shorter than the ground-truth value often produces better results faster. This work formally analyzes this phenomenon and provides an explanation: the time horizon controls the complexity of an induced policy class and mitigates overfitting with limited data. This analysis provides a guide for the principled choice of the effective horizon for IRL. It also prompts us to re-examine the classic IRL formulation: it is more natural to learn jointly the reward and the effective horizon rather than the reward alone with a given horizon. To validate our findings, we implement a cross-validation extension and the experimental results support the theoretical analysis. The project page and code are publicly available.

cs.LG↗

Diverse Concept Proposals for Concept Bottleneck Models

Concept bottleneck models are interpretable predictive models that are often used in domains where model trust is a key priority, such as healthcare. They identify a small number of human-interpretable concepts in the data, which they then use to make predictions. Learning relevant concepts from data proves to be a challenging task. The most predictive concepts may not align with expert intuition, thus, failing interpretability with no recourse. Our proposed approach identifies a number of predictive concepts that explain the data. By offering multiple alternative explanations, we allow the human expert to choose the one that best aligns with their expectation. To demonstrate our method, we show that it is able discover all possible concept representations on a synthetic dataset. On EHR data, our model was able to identify 4 out of the 5 pre-defined concepts without supervision.

cs.LG↗

A Deployed Online Reinforcement Learning Algorithm In An Oral Health Clinical Trial

Dental disease is a prevalent chronic condition associated with substantial financial burden, personal suffering, and increased risk of systemic diseases. Despite widespread recommendations for twice-daily tooth brushing, adherence to recommended oral self-care behaviors remains sub-optimal due to factors such as forgetfulness and disengagement. To address this, we developed Oralytics, a mHealth intervention system designed to complement clinician-delivered preventative care for marginalized individuals at risk for dental disease. Oralytics incorporates an online reinforcement learning algorithm to determine optimal times to deliver intervention prompts that encourage oral self-care behaviors. We have deployed Oralytics in a registered clinical trial. The deployment required careful design to manage challenges specific to the clinical trials setting in the U.S. In this paper, we (1) highlight key design decisions of the RL algorithm that address these challenges and (2) conduct a re-sampling analysis to evaluate algorithm design decisions. A second phase (randomized control trial) of Oralytics is planned to start in spring 2025.

cs.AI↗

Shaping AI's Impact on Billions of Lives

Artificial Intelligence (AI), like any transformative technology, has the potential to be a double-edged sword, leading either toward significant advancements or detrimental outcomes for society as a whole. As is often the case when it comes to widely-used technologies in market economies (e.g., cars and semiconductor chips), commercial interest tends to be the predominant guiding factor. The AI community is at risk of becoming polarized to either take a laissez-faire attitude toward AI development, or to call for government overregulation. Between these two poles we argue for the community of AI practitioners to consciously and proactively work for the common good. This paper offers a blueprint for a new type of innovation infrastructure including 18 concrete milestones to guide AI research in that direction. Our view is that we are still in the early days of practical AI, and focused efforts by practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders can still maximize the upsides of AI and minimize its downsides. We talked to luminaries such as recent Nobelist John Jumper on science, President Barack Obama on governance, former UN Ambassador and former National Security Advisor Susan Rice on security, philanthropist Eric Schmidt on several topics, and science fiction novelist Neal Stephenson on entertainment. This ongoing dialogue and collaborative effort has produced a comprehensive, realistic view of what the actual impact of AI could be, from a diverse assembly of thinkers with deep understanding of this technology and these domains. From these exchanges, five recurring guidelines emerged, which form the cornerstone of a framework for beginning to harness AI in service of the public good. They not only guide our efforts in discovery but also shape our approach to deploying this transformative technology responsibly and ethically.

cs.AI↗

Decision-Focused Model-based Reinforcement Learning for Reward Transfer

Model-based reinforcement learning (MBRL) provides a way to learn a transition model of the environment, which can then be used to plan personalized policies for different patient cohorts and to understand the dynamics involved in the decision-making process. However, standard MBRL algorithms are either sensitive to changes in the reward function or achieve suboptimal performance on the task when the transition model is restricted. Motivated by the need to use simple and interpretable models in critical domains such as healthcare, we propose a novel robust decision-focused (RDF) algorithm that learns a transition model that achieves high returns while being robust to changes in the reward function. We demonstrate our RDF algorithm can be used with several model classes and planning algorithms. We also provide theoretical and empirical evidence, on a variety of simulators and real patient data, that RDF can learn simple yet effective models that can be used to plan personalized policies.

cs.LG↗

Pruning the Path to Optimal Care: Identifying Systematically Suboptimal Medical Decision-Making with Inverse Reinforcement Learning

In aims to uncover insights into medical decision-making embedded within observational data from clinical settings, we present a novel application of Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL) that identifies suboptimal clinician actions based on the actions of their peers. This approach centers two stages of IRL with an intermediate step to prune trajectories displaying behavior that deviates significantly from the consensus. This enables us to effectively identify clinical priorities and values from ICU data containing both optimal and suboptimal clinician decisions. We observe that the benefits of removing suboptimal actions vary by disease and differentially impact certain demographic groups.

cs.LG↗

Decision-Point Guided Safe Policy Improvement

Within batch reinforcement learning, safe policy improvement (SPI) seeks to ensure that the learnt policy performs at least as well as the behavior policy that generated the dataset. The core challenge in SPI is seeking improvements while balancing risk when many state-action pairs may be infrequently visited. In this work, we introduce Decision Points RL (DPRL), an algorithm that restricts the set of state-action pairs (or regions for continuous states) considered for improvement. DPRL ensures high-confidence improvement in densely visited states (i.e. decision points) while still utilizing data from sparsely visited states. By appropriately limiting where and how we may deviate from the behavior policy, we achieve tighter bounds than prior work; specifically, our data-dependent bounds do not scale with the size of the state and action spaces. In addition to the analysis, we demonstrate that DPRL is both safe and performant on synthetic and real datasets.

cs.LG↗

Inverse Reinforcement Learning with Multiple Planning Horizons

In this work, we study an inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) problem where the experts are planning under a shared reward function but with different, unknown planning horizons. Without the knowledge of discount factors, the reward function has a larger feasible solution set, which makes it harder for existing IRL approaches to identify a reward function. To overcome this challenge, we develop algorithms that can learn a global multi-agent reward function with agent-specific discount factors that reconstruct the expert policies. We characterize the feasible solution space of the reward function and discount factors for both algorithms and demonstrate the generalizability of the learned reward function across multiple domains.

cs.LG↗

A Sim2Real Approach for Identifying Task-Relevant Properties in Interpretable Machine Learning

Explanations of an AI's function can assist human decision-makers, but the most useful explanation depends on the decision's context, referred to as the downstream task. User studies are necessary to determine the best explanations for each task. Unfortunately, testing every explanation and task combination is impractical, especially considering the many factors influencing human+AI collaboration beyond the explanation's content. This work leverages two insights to streamline finding the most effective explanation. First, explanations can be characterized by properties, such as faithfulness or complexity, which indicate if they contain the right information for the task. Second, we introduce XAIsim2real, a pipeline for running synthetic user studies. In our validation study, XAIsim2real accurately predicts user preferences across three tasks, making it a valuable tool for refining explanation choices before full studies. Additionally, it uncovers nuanced relationships, like how cognitive budget limits a user's engagement with complex explanations -- a trend confirmed with real users.

cs.HC↗

Effective Monitoring of Online Decision-Making Algorithms in Digital Intervention Implementation

Online AI decision-making algorithms are increasingly used by digital interventions to dynamically personalize treatment to individuals. These algorithms determine, in real-time, the delivery of treatment based on accruing data. The objective of this paper is to provide guidelines for enabling effective monitoring of online decision-making algorithms with the goal of (1) safeguarding individuals and (2) ensuring data quality. We elucidate guidelines and discuss our experience in monitoring online decision-making algorithms in two digital intervention clinical trials (Oralytics and MiWaves). Our guidelines include (1) developing fallback methods, pre-specified procedures executed when an issue occurs, and (2) identifying potential issues categorizing them by severity (red, yellow, and green). Across both trials, the monitoring systems detected real-time issues such as out-of-memory issues, database timeout, and failed communication with an external source. Fallback methods prevented participants from not receiving any treatment during the trial and also prevented the use of incorrect data in statistical analyses. These trials provide case studies for how health scientists can build monitoring systems for their digital intervention. Without these algorithm monitoring systems, critical issues would have gone undetected and unresolved. Instead, these monitoring systems safeguarded participants and ensured the quality of the resulting data for updating the intervention and facilitating scientific discovery. These monitoring guidelines and findings give digital intervention teams the confidence to include online decision-making algorithms in digital interventions.

cs.CY↗

Monitoring Fidelity of Online Reinforcement Learning Algorithms in Clinical Trials

Online reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms offer great potential for personalizing treatment for participants in clinical trials. However, deploying an online, autonomous algorithm in the high-stakes healthcare setting makes quality control and data quality especially difficult to achieve. This paper proposes algorithm fidelity as a critical requirement for deploying online RL algorithms in clinical trials. It emphasizes the responsibility of the algorithm to (1) safeguard participants and (2) preserve the scientific utility of the data for post-trial analyses. We also present a framework for pre-deployment planning and real-time monitoring to help algorithm developers and clinical researchers ensure algorithm fidelity. To illustrate our framework's practical application, we present real-world examples from the Oralytics clinical trial. Since Spring 2023, this trial successfully deployed an autonomous, online RL algorithm to personalize behavioral interventions for participants at risk for dental disease.

cs.LG↗

What Makes a Good Explanation?: A Harmonized View of Properties of Explanations

Interpretability provides a means for humans to verify aspects of machine learning (ML) models and empower human+ML teaming in situations where the task cannot be fully automated. Different contexts require explanations with different properties. For example, the kind of explanation required to determine if an early cardiac arrest warning system is ready to be integrated into a care setting is very different from the type of explanation required for a loan applicant to help determine the actions they might need to take to make their application successful. Unfortunately, there is a lack of standardization when it comes to properties of explanations: different papers may use the same term to mean different quantities, and different terms to mean the same quantity. This lack of a standardized terminology and categorization of the properties of ML explanations prevents us from both rigorously comparing interpretable machine learning methods and identifying what properties are needed in what contexts. In this work, we survey properties defined in interpretable machine learning papers, synthesize them based on what they actually measure, and describe the trade-offs between different formulations of these properties. In doing so, we enable more informed selection of task-appropriate formulations of explanation properties as well as standardization for future work in interpretable machine learning.

cs.LG↗

Towards Model-Agnostic Posterior Approximation for Fast and Accurate Variational Autoencoders

Inference for Variational Autoencoders (VAEs) consists of learning two models: (1) a generative model, which transforms a simple distribution over a latent space into the distribution over observed data, and (2) an inference model, which approximates the posterior of the latent codes given data. The two components are learned jointly via a lower bound to the generative model's log marginal likelihood. In early phases of joint training, the inference model poorly approximates the latent code posteriors. Recent work showed that this leads optimization to get stuck in local optima, negatively impacting the learned generative model. As such, recent work suggests ensuring a high-quality inference model via iterative training: maximizing the objective function relative to the inference model before every update to the generative model. Unfortunately, iterative training is inefficient, requiring heuristic criteria for reverting from iterative to joint training for speed. Here, we suggest an inference method that trains the generative and inference models independently. It approximates the posterior of the true model a priori; fixing this posterior approximation, we then maximize the lower bound relative to only the generative model. By conventional wisdom, this approach should rely on the true prior and likelihood of the true model to approximate its posterior (which are unknown). However, we show that we can compute a deterministic, model-agnostic posterior approximation (MAPA) of the true model's posterior. We then use MAPA to develop a proof-of-concept inference method. We present preliminary results on low-dimensional synthetic data that (1) MAPA captures the trend of the true posterior, and (2) our MAPA-based inference performs better density estimation with less computation than baselines. Lastly, we present a roadmap for scaling the MAPA-based inference method to high-dimensional data.

stat.ML↗

Towards Integrating Personal Knowledge into Test-Time Predictions

Machine learning (ML) models can make decisions based on large amounts of data, but they can be missing personal knowledge available to human users about whom predictions are made. For example, a model trained to predict psychiatric outcomes may know nothing about a patient's social support system, and social support may look different for different patients. In this work, we introduce the problem of human feature integration, which provides a way to incorporate important personal-knowledge from users without domain expertise into ML predictions. We characterize this problem through illustrative user stories and comparisons to existing approaches; we formally describe this problem in a way that paves the ground for future technical solutions; and we provide a proof-of-concept study of a simple version of a solution to this problem in a semi-realistic setting.

cs.LG↗

AI Procurement Checklists: Revisiting Implementation in the Age of AI Governance

Public sector use of AI has been quietly on the rise for the past decade, but only recently have efforts to regulate it entered the cultural zeitgeist. While simple to articulate, promoting ethical and effective roll outs of AI systems in government is a notoriously elusive task. On the one hand there are hard-to-address pitfalls associated with AI-based tools, including concerns about bias towards marginalized communities, safety, and gameability. On the other, there is pressure not to make it too difficult to adopt AI, especially in the public sector which typically has fewer resources than the private sector$\unicode{x2014}$conserving scarce government resources is often the draw of using AI-based tools in the first place. These tensions create a real risk that procedures built to ensure marginalized groups are not hurt by government use of AI will, in practice, be performative and ineffective. To inform the latest wave of regulatory efforts in the United States, we look to jurisdictions with mature regulations around government AI use. We report on lessons learned by officials in Brazil, Singapore and Canada, who have collectively implemented risk categories, disclosure requirements and assessments into the way they procure AI tools. In particular, we investigate two implemented checklists: the Canadian Directive on Automated Decision-Making (CDADM) and the World Economic Forum's AI Procurement in a Box (WEF). We detail three key pitfalls around expertise, risk frameworks and transparency, that can decrease the efficacy of regulations aimed at government AI use and suggest avenues for improvement.

cs.CY↗

Towards Regulatable AI Systems: Technical Gaps and Policy Opportunities

There is increasing attention being given to how to regulate AI systems. As governing bodies grapple with what values to encapsulate into regulation, we consider the technical half of the question: To what extent can AI experts vet an AI system for adherence to regulatory requirements? We investigate this question through the lens of two public sector procurement checklists, identifying what we can do now, what should be possible with technical innovation, and what requirements need a more interdisciplinary approach.

cs.AI↗

Guarantee Regions for Local Explanations

Interpretability methods that utilise local surrogate models (e.g. LIME) are very good at describing the behaviour of the predictive model at a point of interest, but they are not guaranteed to extrapolate to the local region surrounding the point. However, overfitting to the local curvature of the predictive model and malicious tampering can significantly limit extrapolation. We propose an anchor-based algorithm for identifying regions in which local explanations are guaranteed to be correct by explicitly describing those intervals along which the input features can be trusted. Our method produces an interpretable feature-aligned box where the prediction of the local surrogate model is guaranteed to match the predictive model. We demonstrate that our algorithm can be used to find explanations with larger guarantee regions that better cover the data manifold compared to existing baselines. We also show how our method can identify misleading local explanations with significantly poorer guarantee regions.

cs.LG↗

Accuracy-Time Tradeoffs in AI-Assisted Decision Making under Time Pressure

In settings where users both need high accuracy and are time-pressured, such as doctors working in emergency rooms, we want to provide AI assistance that both increases decision accuracy and reduces decision-making time. Current literature focusses on how users interact with AI assistance when there is no time pressure, finding that different AI assistances have different benefits: some can reduce time taken while increasing overreliance on AI, while others do the opposite. The precise benefit can depend on both the user and task. In time-pressured scenarios, adapting when we show AI assistance is especially important: relying on the AI assistance can save time, and can therefore be beneficial when the AI is likely to be right. We would ideally adapt what AI assistance we show depending on various properties (of the task and of the user) in order to best trade off accuracy and time. We introduce a study where users have to answer a series of logic puzzles. We find that time pressure affects how users use different AI assistances, making some assistances more beneficial than others when compared to no-time-pressure settings. We also find that a user's overreliance rate is a key predictor of their behaviour: overreliers and not-overreliers use different AI assistance types differently. We find marginal correlations between a user's overreliance rate (which is related to the user's trust in AI recommendations) and their personality traits (Big Five Personality traits). Overall, our work suggests that AI assistances have different accuracy-time tradeoffs when people are under time pressure compared to no time pressure, and we explore how we might adapt AI assistances in this setting.

cs.HC↗