Explainable artificial intelligence and interpretable machine learning are research fields growing in importance. Yet, the underlying concepts remain somewhat elusive and lack generally agreed definitions. While recent inspiration from social sciences has refocused the work on needs and expectations of human recipients, the field still misses a concrete conceptualisation. We take steps towards addressing this challenge by reviewing the philosophical and social foundations of human explainability, which we then translate into the technological realm. In particular, we scrutinise the notion of algorithmic black boxes and the spectrum of understanding determined by explanatory processes and explainees' background knowledge. This approach allows us to define explainability as (logical) reasoning applied to transparent insights (into black boxes) interpreted under certain background knowledge - a process that engenders understanding in explainees. We then employ this conceptualisation to revisit the much disputed trade-off between transparency and predictive power and its implications for ante-hoc and post-hoc explainers as well as fairness and accountability engendered by explainability. We furthermore discuss components of the machine learning workflow that may be in need of interpretability, building on a range of ideas from human-centred explainability, with a focus on explainees, contrastive statements and explanatory processes. Our discussion reconciles and complements current research to help better navigate open questions - rather than attempting to address any individual issue - thus laying a solid foundation for a grounded discussion and future progress of explainable artificial intelligence and interpretable machine learning. We conclude with a summary of our findings, revisiting the human-centred explanatory process needed to achieve the desired level of algorithmic transparency.
翻译:可解释的人工智能和可解释的机器学习是越来越重要的研究领域。然而,基本概念仍然有些难以捉摸,缺乏普遍同意的定义。虽然社会科学的最近灵感使工作的重点重新转向人类接受者的需求和期望,但该领域仍然缺乏具体的概念化。我们采取步骤应对这一挑战,方法是审查人类解释的哲学和社会基础,然后我们将其转化成技术领域。特别是,我们仔细研究算法黑盒的概念以及解释过程和解释者背景知识所决定的理解范围。这一方法使我们能够将解释性定义为(逻辑)推理适用于根据某些背景知识解释的透明洞察(黑盒),这一过程促使解释者理解需要理解。 然后,我们利用这种概念化来重新审视透明度与预测能力之间的争议性权衡及其对非热量和事后解释者的影响,以及解释性和问责制,我们进一步讨论了可能需要解释的机器学习工作流程的组成部分。我们进一步讨论了从以人为本的可解释性解释性角度出发的一系列观点,从以人为本的可解释性讨论角度出发,在解释性分析中产生理解性结论性结论性结论性结论性结论性结论性,因此我们更注重当前研究、解释性解释性解释性结论性结论性结论性结论性结论性结论性结论性结论性的问题。