arXiv subjects

Nico Potyka

Publications and source records attributed to Nico Potyka.

33 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2023

Argument Attribution Explanations in Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (Technical Report)

Argumentative explainable AI has been advocated by several in recent years, with an increasing interest on explaining the reasoning outcomes of Argumentation Frameworks (AFs). While there is a considerable body of research on qualitatively explaining the reasoning outcomes of AFs with debates/disputes/dialogues in the spirit of extension-based semantics, explaining the quantitative reasoning outcomes of AFs under gradual semantics has not received much attention, despite widespread use in applications. In this paper, we contribute to filling this gap by proposing a novel theory of Argument Attribution Explanations (AAEs) by incorporating the spirit of feature attribution from machine learning in the context of Quantitative Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (QBAFs): whereas feature attribution is used to determine the influence of features towards outputs of machine learning models, AAEs are used to determine the influence of arguments towards topic arguments of interest. We study desirable properties of AAEs, including some new ones and some partially adapted from the literature to our setting. To demonstrate the applicability of our AAEs in practice, we conclude by carrying out two case studies in the scenarios of fake news detection and movie recommender systems.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2023

SpArX: Sparse Argumentative Explanations for Neural Networks [Technical Report]

Neural networks (NNs) have various applications in AI, but explaining their decisions remains challenging. Existing approaches often focus on explaining how changing individual inputs affects NNs' outputs. However, an explanation that is consistent with the input-output behaviour of an NN is not necessarily faithful to the actual mechanics thereof. In this paper, we exploit relationships between multi-layer perceptrons (MLPs) and quantitative argumentation frameworks (QAFs) to create argumentative explanations for the mechanics of MLPs. Our SpArX method first sparsifies the MLP while maintaining as much of the original structure as possible. It then translates the sparse MLP into an equivalent QAF to shed light on the underlying decision process of the MLP, producing global and/or local explanations. We demonstrate experimentally that SpArX can give more faithful explanations than existing approaches, while simultaneously providing deeper insights into the actual reasoning process of MLPs.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2022

Explaining Random Forests using Bipolar Argumentation and Markov Networks (Technical Report)

Random forests are decision tree ensembles that can be used to solve a variety of machine learning problems. However, as the number of trees and their individual size can be large, their decision making process is often incomprehensible. In order to reason about the decision process, we propose representing it as an argumentation problem. We generalize sufficient and necessary argumentative explanations using a Markov network encoding, discuss the relevance of these explanations and establish relationships to families of abductive explanations from the literature. As the complexity of the explanation problems is high, we discuss a probabilistic approximation algorithm and present first experimental results.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2022

Pseudo-Riemannian Graph Convolutional Networks

Graph convolutional networks (GCNs) are powerful frameworks for learning embeddings of graph-structured data. GCNs are traditionally studied through the lens of Euclidean geometry. Recent works find that non-Euclidean Riemannian manifolds provide specific inductive biases for embedding hierarchical or spherical data. However, they cannot align well with data of mixed graph topologies. We consider a larger class of pseudo-Riemannian manifolds that generalize hyperboloid and sphere. We develop new geodesic tools that allow for extending neural network operations into geodesically disconnected pseudo-Riemannian manifolds. As a consequence, we derive a pseudo-Riemannian GCN that models data in pseudo-Riemannian manifolds of constant nonzero curvature in the context of graph neural networks. Our method provides a geometric inductive bias that is sufficiently flexible to model mixed heterogeneous topologies like hierarchical graphs with cycles. We demonstrate the representational capabilities of this method by applying it to the tasks of graph reconstruction, node classification and link prediction on a series of standard graphs with mixed topologies. Empirical results demonstrate that our method outperforms Riemannian counterparts when embedding graphs of complex topologies.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

Faithiful Embeddings for EL++ Knowledge Bases

Recently, increasing efforts are put into learning continual representations for symbolic knowledge bases (KBs). However, these approaches either only embed the data-level knowledge (ABox) or suffer from inherent limitations when dealing with concept-level knowledge (TBox), i.e., they cannot faithfully model the logical structure present in the KBs. We present BoxEL, a geometric KB embedding approach that allows for better capturing the logical structure (i.e., ABox and TBox axioms) in the description logic EL++. BoxEL models concepts in a KB as axis-parallel boxes that are suitable for modeling concept intersection, entities as points inside boxes, and relations between concepts/entities as affine transformations. We show theoretical guarantees (soundness) of BoxEL for preserving logical structure. Namely, the learned model of BoxEL embedding with loss 0 is a (logical) model of the KB. Experimental results on (plausible) subsumption reasonings and a real-world application for protein-protein prediction show that BoxEL outperforms traditional knowledge graph embedding methods as well as state-of-the-art EL++ embedding approaches.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2022

Towards a Theory of Faithfulness: Faithful Explanations of Differentiable Classifiers over Continuous Data

There is broad agreement in the literature that explanation methods should be faithful to the model that they explain, but faithfulness remains a rather vague term. We revisit faithfulness in the context of continuous data and propose two formal definitions of faithfulness for feature attribution methods. Qualitative faithfulness demands that scores reflect the true qualitative effect (positive vs. negative) of the feature on the model and quanitative faithfulness that the magnitude of scores reflect the true quantitative effect. We discuss under which conditions these requirements can be satisfied to which extent (local vs global). As an application of the conceptual idea, we look at differentiable classifiers over continuous data and characterize Gradient-scores as follows: every qualitatively faithful feature attribution method is qualitatively equivalent to Gradient-scores. Furthermore, if an attribution method is quantitatively faithful in the sense that changes of the output of the classifier are proportional to the scores of features, then it is either equivalent to gradient-scoring or it is based on an inferior approximation of the classifier. To illustrate the practical relevance of the theory, we experimentally demonstrate that popular attribution methods can fail to give faithful explanations in the setting where the data is continuous and the classifier differentiable.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2021

Learning Gradual Argumentation Frameworks using Genetic Algorithms

Gradual argumentation frameworks represent arguments and their relationships in a weighted graph. Their graphical structure and intuitive semantics makes them a potentially interesting tool for interpretable machine learning. It has been noted recently that their mechanics are closely related to neural networks, which allows learning their weights from data by standard deep learning frameworks. As a first proof of concept, we propose a genetic algorithm to simultaneously learn the structure of argumentative classification models. To obtain a well interpretable model, the fitness function balances sparseness and accuracy of the classifier. We discuss our algorithm and present first experimental results on standard benchmarks from the UCI machine learning repository. Our prototype learns argumentative classification models that are comparable to decision trees in terms of learning performance and interpretability.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2020

Interpreting Neural Networks as Gradual Argumentation Frameworks (Including Proof Appendix)

We show that an interesting class of feed-forward neural networks can be understood as quantitative argumentation frameworks. This connection creates a bridge between research in Formal Argumentation and Machine Learning. We generalize the semantics of feed-forward neural networks to acyclic graphs and study the resulting computational and semantical properties in argumentation graphs. As it turns out, the semantics gives stronger guarantees than existing semantics that have been tailor-made for the argumentation setting. From a machine-learning perspective, the connection does not seem immediately helpful. While it gives intuitive meaning to some feed-forward-neural networks, they remain difficult to understand due to their size and density. However, the connection seems helpful for combining background knowledge in form of sparse argumentation networks with dense neural networks that have been trained for complementary purposes and for learning the parameters of quantitative argumentation frameworks in an end-to-end fashion from data.

cs.NE↗

arXiv2020

Explainable Automated Reasoning in Law using Probabilistic Epistemic Argumentation

Applying automated reasoning tools for decision support and analysis in law has the potential to make court decisions more transparent and objective. Since there is often uncertainty about the accuracy and relevance of evidence, non-classical reasoning approaches are required. Here, we investigate probabilistic epistemic argumentation as a tool for automated reasoning about legal cases. We introduce a general scheme to model legal cases as probabilistic epistemic argumentation problems, explain how evidence can be modeled and sketch how explanations for legal decisions can be generated automatically. Our framework is easily interpretable, can deal with cyclic structures and imprecise probabilities and guarantees polynomial-time probabilistic reasoning in the worst-case.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2019

Polynomial-time Updates of Epistemic States in a Fragment of Probabilistic Epistemic Argumentation (Technical Report)

Probabilistic epistemic argumentation allows for reasoning about argumentation problems in a way that is well founded by probability theory. Epistemic states are represented by probability functions over possible worlds and can be adjusted to new beliefs using update operators. While the use of probability functions puts this approach on a solid foundational basis, it also causes computational challenges as the amount of data to process depends exponentially on the number of arguments. This leads to bottlenecks in applications such as modelling opponent's beliefs for persuasion dialogues. We show how update operators over probability functions can be related to update operators over much more compact representations that allow polynomial-time updates. We discuss the cognitive and probabilistic-logical plausibility of this approach and demonstrate its applicability in computational persuasion.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2019

A Polynomial-time Fragment of Epistemic Probabilistic Argumentation (Technical Report)

Probabilistic argumentation allows reasoning about argumentation problems in a way that is well-founded by probability theory. However, in practice, this approach can be severely limited by the fact that probabilities are defined by adding an exponential number of terms. We show that this exponential blowup can be avoided in an interesting fragment of epistemic probabilistic argumentation and that some computational problems that have been considered intractable can be solved in polynomial time. We give efficient convex programming formulations for these problems and explore how far our fragment can be extended without loosing tractability.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2019

Extending Modular Semantics for Bipolar Weighted Argumentation (Technical Report)

Weighted bipolar argumentation frameworks offer a tool for decision support and social media analysis. Arguments are evaluated by an iterative procedure that takes initial weights and attack and support relations into account. Until recently, convergence of these iterative procedures was not very well understood in cyclic graphs. Mossakowski and Neuhaus recently introduced a unification of different approaches and proved first convergence and divergence results. We build up on this work, simplify and generalize convergence results and complement them with runtime guarantees. As it turns out, there is a tradeoff between semantics' convergence guarantees and their ability to move strength values away from the initial weights. We demonstrate that divergence problems can be avoided without this tradeoff by continuizing semantics. Semantically, we extend the framework with a Duality property that assures a symmetric impact of attack and support relations. We also present a Java implementation of modular semantics and explain the practical usefulness of the theoretical ideas.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2018

A Tutorial for Weighted Bipolar Argumentation with Continuous Dynamical Systems and the Java Library Attractor

Weighted bipolar argumentation frameworks allow modeling decision problems and online discussions by defining arguments and their relationships. The strength of arguments can be computed based on an initial weight and the strength of attacking and supporting arguments. While previous approaches assumed an acyclic argumentation graph and successively set arguments' strength based on the strength of their parents, recently continuous dynamical systems have been proposed as an alternative. Continuous models update arguments' strength simultaneously and continuously. While there are currently no analytical guarantees for convergence in general graphs, experiments show that continuous models can converge quickly in large cyclic graphs with thousands of arguments. Here, we focus on the high-level ideas of this approach and explain key results and applications. We also introduce Attractor, a Java library that can be used to solve weighted bipolar argumentation problems. Attractor contains implementations of several discrete and continuous models and numerical algorithms to compute solutions. It also provides base classes that can be used to implement, to evaluate and to compare continuous models easily.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2017

Towards Statistical Reasoning in Description Logics over Finite Domains (Full Version)

We present a probabilistic extension of the description logic $\mathcal{ALC}$ for reasoning about statistical knowledge. We consider conditional statements over proportions of the domain and are interested in the probabilistic-logical consequences of these proportions. After introducing some general reasoning problems and analyzing their properties, we present first algorithms and complexity results for reasoning in some fragments of Statistical $\mathcal{ALC}$.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2016

Probabilistic Reasoning in the Description Logic ALCP with the Principle of Maximum Entropy (Full Version)

A central question for knowledge representation is how to encode and handle uncertain knowledge adequately. We introduce the probabilistic description logic ALCP that is designed for representing context-dependent knowledge, where the actual context taking place is uncertain. ALCP allows the expression of logical dependencies on the domain and probabilistic dependencies on the possible contexts. In order to draw probabilistic conclusions, we employ the principle of maximum entropy. We provide reasoning algorithms for this logic, and show that it satisfies several desirable properties of probabilistic logics.

cs.AI↗