skip to main content
10.1145/3233547.3233667acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbcbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
tutorial

Interpretable Machine Learning in Healthcare

Authors Info & Claims
Published:15 August 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

This tutorial extensively covers the definitions, nuances, challenges, and requirements for the design of interpretable and explainable machine learning models and systems in healthcare. We discuss many uses in which interpretable machine learning models are needed in healthcare and how they should be deployed. Additionally, we explore the landscape of recent advances to address the challenges model interpretability in healthcare and also describe how one would go about choosing the right interpretable machine learnig algorithm for a given problem in healthcare.

References

  1. Ahmad, Muhammad Aurangzeb, Zoheb Borbora, Jaideep Srivastava, and Noshir Contractor. "Link prediction across multiple social networks." In Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW), 2010 IEEE International Conference on, pp. 911--918. IEEE, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. l-Shedivat, Maruan, Avinava Dubey, and Eric P. Xing. "Contextual Explanation Networks." arXiv preprint arXiv:1705.10301 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. l-Shedivat, Maruan, Avinava Dubey, and Eric P. Xing. "The Intriguing Properties of Model Explanations."Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. . Biran and K. McKeown. Justification narratives for individual classifications. In Proceedings of the AutoML workshop at ICML, volume 2014, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. avid Gunning Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) DARPA/I2O 2016Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. . Hastie and R. Tibshirani. Generalized additive models . Chapman and Hall/CRC, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. enelius, Andreas, Kai Puolamäki, and Antti Ukkonen. "Interpreting Classifiers through Attribute Interactions in Datasets." (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. enis J Hilton. Conversational processes and causal explanation. Psychological Bulletin, 107(1):65--81, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. ulesza, Todd, Margaret Burnett, Weng-Keen Wong, and Simone Stumpf. "Principles of explanatory debugging to personalize interactive machine learning." In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 126--137. ACM, 2015. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. ipton, Zachary C. "The mythos of model interpretability." arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.03490 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. ou, Yin, Rich Caruana, Johannes Gehrke, and Giles Hooker. "Accurate intelligible models with pairwise interactions." In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, pp. 623--631. ACM, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. iller, Tim. "Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences." arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.07269 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. iller, Tim, Piers Howe, and Liz Sonenberg. "Explainable AI: Beware of Inmates Running the Asylum." In IJCAI-17 Workshop on Explainable AI (XAI), p. 36. 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Google's research chief questions value of 'Explainable AI' George Nott 23 June, 2017 https://www.computerworld.com.au/article/621059/google-research-chief-questions-value-explainable-ai/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. ibeiro, Marco Tulio, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. "Why should i trust you?: Explaining the predictions of any classifier." In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 1135--1144. ACM, 2016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. i, Zhangzhang, and Song-Chun Zhu. "Learning and-or templates for object recognition and detection." IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 35, no. 9 (2013): 2189--2205. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. stun, Berk, and Cynthia Rudin. "Supersparse linear integer models for optimized medical scoring systems." Machine Learning 102, no. 3 (2016): 349--391. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. ang, Fulton, and Cynthia Rudin. "Falling rule lists." In Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, pp. 1013--1022. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. . R. Wick and W. B. Thompson. Reconstructive expert system explanation. Artificial Intelligence, 54(1- 2):33--70, 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. ang, Hongyu, Cynthia Rudin, and Margo Seltzer. "Scalable Bayesian rule lists." arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.08610 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Interpretable Machine Learning in Healthcare

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          BCB '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Bioinformatics, Computational Biology, and Health Informatics
          August 2018
          727 pages
          ISBN:9781450357944
          DOI:10.1145/3233547

          Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 15 August 2018

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • tutorial

          Acceptance Rates

          BCB '18 Paper Acceptance Rate46of148submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate254of885submissions,29%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader