An increasing ubiquity of machine learning (ML) motivates research on algorithms to explain ML models and their predictions -- so-called eXplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). Despite many survey papers and discussions, the goals and capabilities of XAI algorithms are far from being well understood. We argue that this is because of a problematic reasoning scheme in XAI literature: XAI algorithms are said to complement ML models with desired properties, such as "interpretability", or "explainability". These properties are in turn assumed to contribute to a goal, like "trust" in an ML system. But most properties lack precise definitions and their relationship to such goals is far from obvious. The result is a reasoning scheme that obfuscates research results and leaves an important question unanswered: What can one expect from XAI algorithms? In this article, we clarify the goals and capabilities of XAI algorithms from a concrete perspective: that of their users. Explaining ML models is only necessary if users have questions about them. We show that users can ask diverse questions, but that only one of them can be answered by current XAI algorithms. Answering this core question can be trivial, difficult or even impossible, depending on the ML application. Based on these insights, we outline which capabilities policymakers, researchers and society can reasonably expect from XAI algorithms.
翻译:日益普遍的机器学习(ML)激励了对算法的研究,以解释ML模型及其预测 -- -- 所谓的“信任”模型及其预测 -- -- 所谓的explable 人工智能(XAI)。尽管有许多调查论文和讨论,但XAI算法的目标和能力远未被很好地理解。我们争辩说,这是因为XAI文献中的一个有问题的推理方案:据说XAI算法是用“可解释性”或“可解释性”等预期性能来补充ML模型的。这些属性反过来被假定为有助于一个目标,如ML系统中的“信任”模型。但大多数属性缺乏准确的定义,而且它们与这些目标的关系也远非显而易见。结果是一个解释方案,它模糊了研究结果,留下一个没有回答的重要问题:一个人可以从XAI算法中期待什么? 在文章中,我们从一个具体的角度澄清XAI算法的目标和能力:它们的用户。解释ML模型是必要的,只有当用户对其有疑问时才能解释。我们表明用户可以提出不同的问题,但只有其中之一才能被当前的XAI算法和难以理解。