Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Thomas Gerspacher
dblp:272/5377
· DBLP profile ↗
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
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability |
0.9 | 2 | 2021 | 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 |
0.5 | 1 | 2021 | Explanations for Monotonic Classifiers · ICML 2021 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › logic-based explanation
abductive explanation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | 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
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | Explanations for Monotonic ClassifiersabstractIn 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 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2020 | Explaining Naive Bayes and Other Linear Classifiers with Polynomial Time and DelayabstractRecent 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 |
NeurIPS | 2 |