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

Naama Boer

dblp:242/5140 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none

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

Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 1 first-author

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 · 93% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 7%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
2 papers
Data models and query languages · 54% Data integration and cleaning · 46%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
interpretability
0.822020
Personal Insights for Altering Decisions of Tree-based Ensembles over Time · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020
Just in Time: Personal Temporal Insights for Altering Model Decisions · ICDE 2019
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability › counterfactual explanation
algorithmic recourse
0.412020
Personal Insights for Altering Decisions of Tree-based Ensembles over Time · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › interpretability
counterfactual explanation
0.412019
Just in Time: Personal Temporal Insights for Altering Model Decisions · ICDE 2019
Data models and query languages
constraint databases
0.112020
Personal Insights for Altering Decisions of Tree-based Ensembles over Time · Proc. VLDB Endow. 2020
Data integration and cleaning
model management
0.112019
Just in Time: Personal Temporal Insights for Altering Model Decisions · ICDE 2019

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

tree-based ensemble · 0.9constraint databases · 0.9model prediction · 0.8database querying · 0.8counterfactual explanation · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 Personal Insights for Altering Decisions of Tree-based Ensembles over Time
abstract
Machine Learning models are prevalent in critical human-related decision making, such as resume filtering and loan applications. Refused individuals naturally ask what could change the decision, should they reapply. This question is hard for the model owner to answer: first, the model is typically complex and not easily interpretable; second, models may be updated periodically; and last, attributes of the individual seeking approval are apt to change in time. While each of these challenges have been extensively studied in isolation, their conjunction has not. To this end, we propose a novel framework that allows users to devise a plan of action to individuals in presence of Machine Learning classification, where both the ML model and the user properties are expected to change over time. Our technical solution is currently confined to a particular yet important class of models, namely those of tree-based ensembles (Random Forests, Gradient Boosted trees). In this setting it uniquely combines state-of-the-art solutions for single model interpretation, domain adaptation techniques for predicting future models, and constraint databases to represent and query the space of possible actions. We devise efficient algorithms that leverage these foundations in a novel solution, and experimentally show that they are effective in proposing useful and actionable steps leading to the desired classification.
Nave Frost, Naama Boer, Daniel Deutch, Tova Milo
Proc. VLDB Endow.2
2019 Just in Time: Personal Temporal Insights for Altering Model Decisions
abstract
The interpretability of complex Machine Learning models is coming to be a critical social concern, as they are increasingly used in human-related decision-making processes such as resume filtering or loan applications. Individuals receiving an undesired classification are likely to call for an explanation - preferably one that specifies what they should do in order to alter that decision when they reapply in the future. Existing work focuses on a single ML model and a single point in time, whereas in practice, both models and data evolve over time: an explanation for an application rejection in 2018 may be irrelevant in 2019 since in the meantime both the model and the applicant's data can change. To this end, we propose a novel framework that provides users with insights and plans for changing their classification in particular future time points. The solution is based on combining state-of-the-art algorithms for (single) model explanations, ones for predicting future models, and database-style querying of the obtained explanations. We propose to demonstrate the usefulness of our solution in the context of loan applications, and interactively engage the audience in computing and viewing suggestions tailored for applicants based on their unique characteristic.
Naama Boer, Daniel Deutch, Nave Frost, Tova Milo
ICDE1