ML model design either starts with an interpretable model or a Blackbox and explains it post hoc. Blackbox models are flexible but difficult to explain, while interpretable models are inherently explainable. Yet, interpretable models require extensive ML knowledge and tend to be less flexible, potentially underperforming than their Blackbox equivalents. This paper aims to blur the distinction between a post hoc explanation of a Blackbox and constructing interpretable models. Beginning with a Blackbox, we iteratively carve out a mixture of interpretable models and a residual network. The interpretable models identify a subset of samples and explain them using First Order Logic (FOL), providing basic reasoning on concepts from the Blackbox. We route the remaining samples through a flexible residual. We repeat the method on the residual network until all the interpretable models explain the desired proportion of data. Our extensive experiments show that our route, interpret, and repeat approach (1) identifies a richer diverse set of instance-specific concepts with high concept completeness via interpretable models by specializing in various subsets of data without compromising in performance, (2) identifies the relatively “harder” samples to explain via residuals, (3) outperforms the interpretable by-design models by significant margins during test-time interventions, (4) can be used to fix the shortcut learned by the original Blackbox.

OBJECTIVE: Drawing causal estimates from observational data is problematic, because datasets often contain underlying bias (eg, discrimination in treatment assignment). To examine causal effects, it is important to evaluate what-if scenarios-the so-called "counterfactuals." We propose a novel deep learning architecture for propensity score matching and counterfactual prediction-the deep propensity network using a sparse autoencoder (DPN-SA)-to tackle the problems of high dimensionality, nonlinear/nonparallel treatment assignment, and residual confounding when estimating treatment effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used 2 randomized prospective datasets, a semisynthetic one with nonlinear/nonparallel treatment selection bias and simulated counterfactual outcomes from the Infant Health and Development Program and a real-world dataset from the LaLonde's employment training program. We compared different configurations of the DPN-SA against logistic regression and LASSO as well as deep counterfactual networks with propensity dropout (DCN-PD). Models' performances were assessed in terms of average treatment effects, mean squared error in precision on effect's heterogeneity, and average treatment effect on the treated, over multiple training/test runs. RESULTS: The DPN-SA outperformed logistic regression and LASSO by 36%-63%, and DCN-PD by 6%-10% across all datasets. All deep learning architectures yielded average treatment effects close to the true ones with low variance. Results were also robust to noise-injection and addition of correlated variables. Code is publicly available at https://github.com/Shantanu48114860/DPN-SAz. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Deep sparse autoencoders are particularly suited for treatment effect estimation studies using electronic health records because they can handle high-dimensional covariate sets, large sample sizes, and complex heterogeneity in treatment assignments.

Early and accurate identification of Parkinsonian syndromes (PS) involving presynaptic degeneration from nondegenerative variants such as scans without evidence of dopaminergic deficit (SWEDD) and tremor disorders is important for effective patient management as the course, therapy, and prognosis differ substantially between the two groups. In this study, we use single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) images from healthy normal, early PD, and SWEDD subjects, as obtained from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) database, and process them to compute shape- and surface-fitting-based features. We use these features to develop and compare various classification models that can discriminate between scans showing dopaminergic deficit, as in PD, from scans without the deficit, as in healthy normal or SWEDD. Along with it, we also compare these features with striatal binding ratio (SBR)-based features, which are well established and clinically used, by computing a feature-importance score using random forests technique. We observe that the support vector machine (SVM) classifier gives the best performance with an accuracy of 97.29%. These features also show higher importance than the SBR-based features. We infer from the study that shape analysis and surface fitting are useful and promising methods for extracting discriminatory features that can be used to develop diagnostic models that might have the potential to help clinicians in the diagnostic process.