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

Alexander Chapanin

dblp:358/4634 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 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
1 paper
Trustworthy machine learning · 75% Vision and language · 25%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
counterfactual explanation
0.812024
Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.812024
Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals · ICLR 2024
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › post-hoc explanation
model-agnostic explanation
0.812024
Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals · ICLR 2024
Computer vision › Vision and language
vision-language model
0.812024
Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals · ICLR 2024

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

large language model · 0.8embedding matching · 0.8counterfactual generation · 0.8causal graph · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Faithful Explanations of Black-box NLP Models Using LLM-generated Counterfactuals
abstract
Causal explanations of the predictions of NLP systems are essential to ensure safety and establish trust. Yet, existing methods often fall short of explaining model predictions effectively or efficiently and are often model-specific. In this paper, we address model-agnostic explanations, proposing two approaches for counterfactual (CF) approximation. The first approach is CF generation, where a large language model (LLM) is prompted to change a specific text concept while keeping confounding concepts unchanged. While this approach is demonstrated to be very effective, applying LLM at inference-time is costly. We hence present a second approach based on matching, and propose a method that is guided by an LLM at training-time and learns a dedicated embedding space. This space is faithful to a given causal graph and effectively serves to identify matches that approximate CFs. After showing theoretically that approximating CFs is required in order to construct faithful explanations, we benchmark our approaches and explain several models, including LLMs with billions of parameters. Our empirical results demonstrate the excellent performance of CF generation models as model-agnostic explainers. Moreover, our matching approach, which requires far less test-time resources, also provides effective explanations, surpassing many baselines. We also find that Top-K techniques universally improve every tested method. Finally, we showcase the potential of LLMs in constructing new benchmarks for model explanation and subsequently validate our conclusions. Our work illuminates new pathways for efficient and accurate approaches to interpreting NLP systems.
Yair Ori Gat, Nitay Calderon, Amir Feder, Alexander Chapanin, Roi Reichart
ICLR4