Numerous government initiatives (e.g. the EU with GDPR) are coming to the conclusion that the increasing complexity of modern software systems must be contrasted with some Rights to Explanation and metrics for the Impact Assessment of these tools, that allow humans to understand and oversee the output of Automated Decision Making systems. Explainable AI was born as a pathway to allow humans to explore and understand the inner working of complex systems. But establishing what is an explanation and objectively evaluating explainability, are not trivial tasks. With this paper, we present a new model-agnostic metric to measure the Degree of eXplainability of correct information in an objective way, exploiting a specific model from Ordinary Language Philosophy called the Achinstein's Theory of Explanations. In order to understand whether this metric is actually behaving as explainability is expected to, we designed a few experiments and a user-study on two realistic AI-based systems for healthcare and finance, involving famous AI technology including Artificial Neural Networks and TreeSHAP. The results we obtained are very encouraging, suggesting that our proposed metric for measuring the Degree of eXplainability is robust on several scenarios and it can be eventually exploited for a lawful Impact Assessment of an Automated Decision Making system.
翻译:许多政府倡议(例如欧盟与GDPR)正在得出结论,现代软件系统日益复杂,必须把现代软件系统日益复杂的程度与一些解释权和影响评估标准加以对比,使人类能够理解和监督自动决策系统的产出。可以解释的AI是人类探索和了解复杂系统内部工作的途径。但确定什么是解释和客观评估的解释性任务不是微不足道的任务。我们提出一个新的模型性、不可知度衡量指标,以客观地衡量正确信息的易分度,利用普通语言哲学中称为“阿钦斯坦解释理论”的具体模型。为了了解这一指标是否实际上可以解释,我们设计了一些实验和用户研究,探讨两种现实的基于AI的保健与融资系统,其中涉及著名的人工神经网络和TreeSHAP等人工智能技术。我们获得的结果非常令人鼓舞,它表明我们提议的测量电子Xpla可容度的标准最终能够被利用,从而对若干设想进行一个合法的风险评估。