SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Tim Miller

Publications and source records attributed to Tim Miller.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Deceptive Reinforcement Learning in Model-Free Domains

This paper investigates deceptive reinforcement learning for privacy preservation in model-free and continuous action space domains. In reinforcement learning, the reward function defines the agent's objective. In adversarial scenarios, an agent may need to both maximise rewards and keep its reward function private from observers. Recent research presented the ambiguity model (AM), which selects actions that are ambiguous over a set of possible reward functions, via pre-trained $Q$-functions. Despite promising results in model-based domains, our investigation shows that AM is ineffective in model-free domains due to misdirected state space exploration. It is also inefficient to train and inapplicable in continuous action space domains. We propose the deceptive exploration ambiguity model (DEAM), which learns using the deceptive policy during training, leading to targeted exploration of the state space. DEAM is also applicable in continuous action spaces. We evaluate DEAM in discrete and continuous action space path planning environments. DEAM achieves similar performance to an optimal model-based version of AM and outperforms a model-free version of AM in terms of path cost, deceptiveness and training efficiency. These results extend to the continuous domain.

cs.AI

Explainable AI is Dead, Long Live Explainable AI! Hypothesis-driven decision support

In this paper, we argue for a paradigm shift from the current model of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), which may be counter-productive to better human decision making. In early decision support systems, we assumed that we could give people recommendations and that they would consider them, and then follow them when required. However, research found that people often ignore recommendations because they do not trust them; or perhaps even worse, people follow them blindly, even when the recommendations are wrong. Explainable artificial intelligence mitigates this by helping people to understand how and why models give certain recommendations. However, recent research shows that people do not always engage with explainability tools enough to help improve decision making. The assumption that people will engage with recommendations and explanations has proven to be unfounded. We argue this is because we have failed to account for two things. First, recommendations (and their explanations) take control from human decision makers, limiting their agency. Second, giving recommendations and explanations does not align with the cognitive processes employed by people making decisions. This position paper proposes a new conceptual framework called Evaluative AI for explainable decision support. This is a machine-in-the-loop paradigm in which decision support tools provide evidence for and against decisions made by people, rather than provide recommendations to accept or reject. We argue that this mitigates issues of over- and under-reliance on decision support tools, and better leverages human expertise in decision making.

cs.AI

Explaining Model Confidence Using Counterfactuals

Displaying confidence scores in human-AI interaction has been shown to help build trust between humans and AI systems. However, most existing research uses only the confidence score as a form of communication. As confidence scores are just another model output, users may want to understand why the algorithm is confident to determine whether to accept the confidence score. In this paper, we show that counterfactual explanations of confidence scores help study participants to better understand and better trust a machine learning model's prediction. We present two methods for understanding model confidence using counterfactual explanation: (1) based on counterfactual examples; and (2) based on visualisation of the counterfactual space. Both increase understanding and trust for study participants over a baseline of no explanation, but qualitative results show that they are used quite differently, leading to recommendations of when to use each one and directions of designing better explanations.

cs.AI

Explainable Goal Recognition: A Framework Based on Weight of Evidence

We introduce and evaluate an eXplainable Goal Recognition (XGR) model that uses the Weight of Evidence (WoE) framework to explain goal recognition problems. Our model provides human-centered explanations that answer why? and why not? questions. We computationally evaluate the performance of our system over eight different domains. Using a human behavioral study to obtain the ground truth from human annotators, we further show that the XGR model can successfully generate human-like explanations. We then report on a study with 60 participants who observe agents playing Sokoban game and then receive explanations of the goal recognition output. We investigate participants' understanding obtained by explanations through task prediction, explanation satisfaction, and trust.

cs.AI

Real-Time Counterfactual Explanations For Robotic Systems With Multiple Continuous Outputs

Although many machine learning methods, especially from the field of deep learning, have been instrumental in addressing challenges within robotic applications, we cannot take full advantage of such methods before these can provide performance and safety guarantees. The lack of trust that impedes the use of these methods mainly stems from a lack of human understanding of what exactly machine learning models have learned, and how robust their behaviour is. This is the problem the field of explainable artificial intelligence aims to solve. Based on insights from the social sciences, we know that humans prefer contrastive explanations, i.e.\ explanations answering the hypothetical question "what if?". In this paper, we show that linear model trees are capable of producing answers to such questions, so-called counterfactual explanations, for robotic systems, including in the case of multiple, continuous inputs and outputs. We demonstrate the use of this method to produce counterfactual explanations for two robotic applications. Additionally, we explore the issue of infeasibility, which is of particular interest in systems governed by the laws of physics.

cs.RO

Concept-based Explanations using Non-negative Concept Activation Vectors and Decision Tree for CNN Models

This paper evaluates whether training a decision tree based on concepts extracted from a concept-based explainer can increase interpretability for Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) models and boost the fidelity and performance of the used explainer. CNNs for computer vision have shown exceptional performance in critical industries. However, it is a significant barrier when deploying CNNs due to their complexity and lack of interpretability. Recent studies to explain computer vision models have shifted from extracting low-level features (pixel-based explanations) to mid-or high-level features (concept-based explanations). The current research direction tends to use extracted features in developing approximation algorithms such as linear or decision tree models to interpret an original model. In this work, we modify one of the state-of-the-art concept-based explanations and propose an alternative framework named TreeICE. We design a systematic evaluation based on the requirements of fidelity (approximate models to original model's labels), performance (approximate models to ground-truth labels), and interpretability (meaningful of approximate models to humans). We conduct computational evaluation (for fidelity and performance) and human subject experiments (for interpretability) We find that Tree-ICE outperforms the baseline in interpretability and generates more human readable explanations in the form of a semantic tree structure. This work features how important to have more understandable explanations when interpretability is crucial.

cs.CV

Are we measuring trust correctly in explainability, interpretability, and transparency research?

This paper presents an argument for why we are not measuring trust sufficiently in explainability, interpretability, and transparency research. Most studies ask participants to complete a trust scale to rate their trust of a model that has been explained/interpreted. If the trust is increased, we consider this a positive. However, there are two issues with this. First, we usually have no way of knowing whether participants should trust the model. Trust should surely decrease if a model is of poor quality. Second, these scales measure perceived trust rather than demonstrated trust. This paper showcases three methods that do a good job at measuring perceived and demonstrated trust. It is intended to be starting point for discussion on this topic, rather than to be the final say. The author invites critique and discussion.

cs.HC

Improving Model Understanding and Trust with Counterfactual Explanations of Model Confidence

In this paper, we show that counterfactual explanations of confidence scores help users better understand and better trust an AI model's prediction in human-subject studies. Showing confidence scores in human-agent interaction systems can help build trust between humans and AI systems. However, most existing research only used the confidence score as a form of communication, and we still lack ways to explain why the algorithm is confident. This paper also presents two methods for understanding model confidence using counterfactual explanation: (1) based on counterfactual examples; and (2) based on visualisation of the counterfactual space.

cs.LG

Rapid build-up of the stellar content in the protocluster core SPT2349$-$56 at $z\,{=}\,4.3$

The protocluster SPT2349$-$56 at $z\,{=}\,4.3$ contains one of the most actively star-forming cores known, yet constraints on the total stellar mass of this system are highly uncertain. We have therefore carried out deep optical and infrared observations of this system, probing rest-frame ultraviolet to infrared wavelengths. Using the positions of the spectroscopically-confirmed protocluster members, we identify counterparts and perform detailed source deblending, allowing us to fit spectral energy distributions in order to estimate stellar masses. We show that the galaxies in SPT2349$-$56 have stellar masses proportional to their high star-formation rates, consistent with other protocluster galaxies and field submillimetre galaxies (SMGs) around redshift 4. The galaxies in SPT2349$-$56 have on average lower molecular gas-to-stellar mass fractions and depletion timescales than field SMGs, although with considerable scatter. We construct the stellar-mass function for SPT2349$-$56 and compare it to the stellar-mass function of $z\,{=}\,1$ galaxy clusters, finding consistent shapes between the two. We measure rest-frame galaxy ultraviolet half-light radii from our HST-F160W imaging, finding that on average the galaxies in our sample are similar in size to typical star-forming galaxies at these redshifts. However, the brightest HST-detected galaxy in our sample, found near the luminosity-weighted centre of the protocluster core, remains unresolved at this wavelength. Hydrodynamical simulations predict that the core galaxies will quickly merge into a brightest cluster galaxy, thus our observations provide a direct view of the early formation mechanisms of this class of object.

astro-ph.GA

A giant shell of ionized gas discovered near M82 with the Dragonfly Spectral Line Mapper pathfinder

We present the discovery of a giant cloud of ionized gas in the field of the starbursting galaxy M82. Emission from the cloud is seen in H$α$ and [NII]$λ$6583 in data obtained though a small pathfinder instrument used to test the key ideas that will be implemented in the Dragonfly Spectral Line Mapper, an upcoming ultranarrow-bandpass imaging version of the Dragonfly Telephoto Array. The discovered cloud has a shell-like morphology with a linear extent of $0.8^{\circ}$ and is positioned $0.6^{\circ}$ northwest of M82. At the heliocentric distance of the M81 group, the cloud's extent corresponds to 55 kpc and its projected distance from the nucleus of M82 is 40 kpc. The cloud has an average H$α$ surface brightness of $2\times10^{-18}$ $\mathrm{erg} ~\mathrm{cm}^{-2} ~\mathrm{s}^{-1} ~\mathrm{arcsec}^{-2}$. The [NII]$λ$6583/H$α$ line ratio varies from [NII]/H$α$ $\sim0.2$ to [NII]/H$α$ $\sim1.0$ across the cloud, with higher values found in its eastern end. Follow-up spectra obtained with Keck-LRIS confirm the existence of the cloud and yield line ratios of [NII]$λ$6583/H$α$ = 0.340 $\pm$ 0.003 and [SII]$λ$6716,6731/H$α$ = 0.64 $\pm$ 0.03 in the cloud. This giant cloud of material could be lifted from M82 by tidal interactions or by its powerful starburst. Alternatively, it may be gas infalling from the cosmic web, potentially precipitated by the superwinds of M82. Deeper data are needed to test these ideas further. The upcoming Dragonfly Spectral Line Mapper will have 120 lenses, $40\times$ more than in the pathfinder instrument used to obtain the data presented here.

astro-ph.GA

A Nascent Tidal Dwarf Galaxy Forming within the Northern HI Streamer of M82

We identify a $\sim$600 pc-wide region of active star formation located within a tidal streamer of M82 via $Hα$ emission ($F_{Hα}\sim 6.5\times10^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$), using a pathfinder instrument based on the Dragonfly Telephoto Array. The object is kinematically decoupled from the disk of M82 as confirmed via Keck / LRIS spectroscopy, and is spatially and kinematically coincident with an overdensity of HI and molecular hydrogen within the "northern HI streamer" induced by the passage of M81 several hundred Myr ago. From HI data, we estimate that $\sim5\times10^7$ M$_{\odot}$ of gas is present in the specific overdensity coincident with the $Hα$ source. The object's derived metallicity (12+$\log(O/H)\simeq 8.6$), position within a gas-rich tidal feature, and morphology (600 pc diameter with multiple star forming clumps), indicate that it is likely a tidal dwarf galaxy in the earliest stages of formation.

astro-ph.GA

Efficient Multi-agent Epistemic Planning: Teaching Planners About Nested Belief

Many AI applications involve the interaction of multiple autonomous agents, requiring those agents to reason about their own beliefs, as well as those of other agents. However, planning involving nested beliefs is known to be computationally challenging. In this work, we address the task of synthesizing plans that necessitate reasoning about the beliefs of other agents. We plan from the perspective of a single agent with the potential for goals and actions that involve nested beliefs, non-homogeneous agents, co-present observations, and the ability for one agent to reason as if it were another. We formally characterize our notion of planning with nested belief, and subsequently demonstrate how to automatically convert such problems into problems that appeal to classical planning technology for solving efficiently. Our approach represents an important step towards applying the well-established field of automated planning to the challenging task of planning involving nested beliefs of multiple agents.

cs.AI

Modelling Strategic Deceptive Planning in Adversarial Multi-Agent Systems

Deception is virtually ubiquitous in warfare, and should be a central consideration for military operations research. However, studies of agent behaviour in simulated operations have typically neglected to include explicit models of deception. This paper proposes that a computational model that approximates the human deceptive planning process would enable the authentic representation of strategic deception in multi-agent systems. The proposed deceptive planning model provides a framework for studying, explaining, and discovering deceptive behaviours, enabling the generation of novel solutions to adversarial planning problems.

cs.MA

Modeling Communication of Collaborative Multi-Agent System under Epistemic Planning

In most multiagent applications, communication is essential among agents to coordinate their actions, and thus achieve their goal. However, communication often has a related cost that affects overall system performance. In this paper, we draw inspiration from studies of epistemic planning to develop a communication model for agents that allows them to cooperate and make communication decisions effectively within a planning task. The proposed model treats a communication process as an action that modifies the epistemic state of the team. In two simulated tasks, we evaluate whether agents can cooperate effectively and achieve higher performance using communication protocol modeled in our epistemic planning framework. Based on an empirical study conducted using search and rescue tasks with different scenarios, our results show that the proposed model improved team performance across all scenarios compared with baseline models.

cs.MA

Invertible Concept-based Explanations for CNN Models with Non-negative Concept Activation Vectors

Convolutional neural network (CNN) models for computer vision are powerful but lack explainability in their most basic form. This deficiency remains a key challenge when applying CNNs in important domains. Recent work on explanations through feature importance of approximate linear models has moved from input-level features (pixels or segments) to features from mid-layer feature maps in the form of concept activation vectors (CAVs). CAVs contain concept-level information and could be learned via clustering. In this work, we rethink the ACE algorithm of Ghorbani et~al., proposing an alternative invertible concept-based explanation (ICE) framework to overcome its shortcomings. Based on the requirements of fidelity (approximate models to target models) and interpretability (being meaningful to people), we design measurements and evaluate a range of matrix factorization methods with our framework. We find that non-negative concept activation vectors (NCAVs) from non-negative matrix factorization provide superior performance in interpretability and fidelity based on computational and human subject experiments. Our framework provides both local and global concept-level explanations for pre-trained CNN models.

cs.CV

Collaborative Human-Agent Planning for Resilience

Intelligent agents powered by AI planning assist people in complex scenarios, such as managing teams of semi-autonomous vehicles. However, AI planning models may be incomplete, leading to plans that do not adequately meet the stated objectives, especially in unpredicted situations. Humans, who are apt at identifying and adapting to unusual situations, may be able to assist planning agents in these situations by encoding their knowledge into a planner at run-time. We investigate whether people can collaborate with agents by providing their knowledge to an agent using linear temporal logic (LTL) at run-time without changing the agent's domain model. We presented 24 participants with baseline plans for situations in which a planner had limitations, and asked the participants for workarounds for these limitations. We encoded these workarounds as LTL constraints. Results show that participants' constraints improved the expected return of the plans by 10% ($p < 0.05$) relative to baseline plans, demonstrating that human insight can be used in collaborative planning for resilience. However, participants used more declarative than control constraints over time, but declarative constraints produced plans less similar to the expectation of the participants, which could lead to potential trust issues.

cs.AI

LEx: A Framework for Operationalising Layers of Machine Learning Explanations

Several social factors impact how people respond to AI explanations used to justify AI decisions affecting them personally. In this position paper, we define a framework called the \textit{layers of explanation} (LEx), a lens through which we can assess the appropriateness of different types of explanations. The framework uses the notions of \textit{sensitivity} (emotional responsiveness) of features and the level of \textit{stakes} (decision's consequence) in a domain to determine whether different types of explanations are \textit{appropriate} in a given context. We demonstrate how to use the framework to assess the appropriateness of different types of explanations in different domains.

cs.LG

Conceptualising Contestability: Perspectives on Contesting Algorithmic Decisions

As the use of algorithmic systems in high-stakes decision-making increases, the ability to contest algorithmic decisions is being recognised as an important safeguard for individuals. Yet, there is little guidance on what `contestability'--the ability to contest decisions--in relation to algorithmic decision-making requires. Recent research presents different conceptualisations of contestability in algorithmic decision-making. We contribute to this growing body of work by describing and analysing the perspectives of people and organisations who made submissions in response to Australia's proposed `AI Ethics Framework', the first framework of its kind to include `contestability' as a core ethical principle. Our findings reveal that while the nature of contestability is disputed, it is seen as a way to protect individuals, and it resembles contestability in relation to human decision-making. We reflect on and discuss the implications of these findings.

cs.CY