Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Thomas Gerspacher

dblp:272/5377 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2021
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Trustworthy machine learning · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.922021
Explanations for Monotonic Classifiers · ICML 2021
Explaining Naive Bayes and Other Linear Classifiers with Polynomial Time and Delay · NeurIPS 2020
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
formal explanation
0.512021
Explanations for Monotonic Classifiers · ICML 2021
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › logic-based explanation
abductive explanation
0.412020
Explaining Naive Bayes and Other Linear Classifiers with Polynomial Time and Delay · NeurIPS 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

polynomial-time algorithm · 0.5model-agnostic enumeration · 0.5polynomial-delay enumeration · 0.4log-linear time algorithm · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2021 Explanations for Monotonic Classifiers
abstract
In many classification tasks there is a requirement of monotonicity. Concretely, if all else remains constant, increasing (resp. decreasing) the value of one or more features must not decrease (resp. increase) the value of the prediction. Despite comprehensive efforts on learning monotonic classifiers, dedicated approaches for explaining monotonic classifiers are scarce and classifier-specific. This paper describes novel algorithms for the computation of one formal explanation of a (black-box) monotonic classifier. These novel algorithms are polynomial (indeed linear) in the run time complexity of the classifier. Furthermore, the paper presents a practically efficient model-agnostic algorithm for enumerating formal explanations.
João Marques-Silva 0001, Thomas Gerspacher, Martin C. Cooper, Alexey Ignatiev, Nina Narodytska
ICML2
2020 Explaining Naive Bayes and Other Linear Classifiers with Polynomial Time and Delay
abstract
Recent work proposed the computation of so-called PI-explanations of Naive Bayes Classifiers (NBCs). PI-explanations are subset-minimal sets of feature-value pairs that are sufficient for the prediction, and have been computed with state-of-the-art exact algorithms that are worst-case exponential in time and space. In contrast, we show that the computation of one PI-explanation for an NBC can be achieved in log-linear time, and that the same result also applies to the more general class of linear classifiers. Furthermore, we show that the enumeration of PI-explanations can be obtained with polynomial delay. Experimental results demonstrate the performance gains of the new algorithms when compared with earlier work. The experimental results also investigate ways to measure the quality of heuristic explanations.
João Marques-Silva 0001, Thomas Gerspacher, Martin C. Cooper, Alexey Ignatiev, Nina Narodytska
NeurIPS2