Efficient rule mining on large modern knowledge graphs (KGs) is a major challenge due to the exponential search space. Current systems -- especially those aiming for exhaustive mining -- remain resource- and time-consuming. In this paper, we propose MiniAMIE, a rule mining approach based on the AMIE algorithm, which restricts AMIE's language bias and estimates key rule metrics using fast approximations. Our experiments on several KGs illustrate the trade-offs of this design and show that MiniAMIE achieves a substantial speed-up while maintaining some good-quality rules.

International audience

Recent technological advances rely on accurate decision support systems that can be perceived as black boxes due to their overwhelming complexity. This lack of transparency can lead to technical, ethical, legal, and trust issues. For example, if the control module of a self-driving car failed at detecting a pedestrian, it becomes crucial to know why the system erred. In some other cases, the decision system may reflect unacceptable biases that can generate distrust. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), approved by the European Parliament in 2018, suggests that individuals should be able to obtain explanations of the decisions made from their data by automated processing, and to challenge those decisions. All these reasons have given rise to the domain of interpretable and explainable AI. AIMLAI aims at gathering researchers, experts and professionals, from inside and outside the domain of AI, interested in the topic of interpretable ML and interpretable AI. The workshop encourages interdisciplinary collaborations, with particular emphasis in knowledge management, Infovis, human computer interaction and psychology. It also welcomes applied research for use cases where interpretability matters. AIMLAI envisions to become a discussion venue for the advent of novel interpretable algorithms and explainability modules that mediate the communication between complex ML/AI systems and users.

The increasing interest in transparent and fair AI systems has propelled the research in explainable AI (XAI). One of the main research lines in XAI is post-hoc explainability, the task of explaining the logic of an already deployed black-box model. This is usually achieved by learning an interpretable surrogate function that approximates the black box. Among the existing explanation paradigms, local linear explanations are one of the most popular due to their simplicity and fidelity. Despite their advantages, linear surrogates may not always be the most adapted method to produce reliable, i.e., unambiguous and faithful explanations. Hence, this paper introduces Adapted Post-hoc Explanations (APE), a novel method that characterizes the decision boundary of a black-box classifier and identifies when a linear model constitutes a reliable explanation. Besides, characterizing the black-box frontier allows us to provide complementary counterfactual explanations. Our experimental evaluation shows that APE identifies accurately the situations where linear surrogates are suitable while also providing meaningful counterfactual explanations.

Over the past few years, we have witnessed the emergence of large knowledge graphs built by extracting and combining information from multiple sources. This has propelled many advances in query processing over knowledge graphs, however the aspect of providing provenance explanations for query results has so far been mostly neglected. We therefore propose a novel method, SPARQLprov, based on query rewriting, to compute how-provenance polynomials for SPARQL queries over knowledge graphs. Contrary to existing works, SPARQLprov is system-agnostic and can be applied to standard and already deployed SPARQL engines without the need of customized extensions. We rely on spm-semirings to compute polynomial annotations that respect the property of commutation with homomorphisms on monotonic and non-monotonic SPARQL queries without aggregate functions. Our evaluation on real and synthetic data shows that SPARQLprov over standard engines incurs an acceptable runtime overhead w.r.t. the original query, competing with state-of-the-art solutions for how-provenance computation.

The Third Workshop on "Advances in Interpretable Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence" (AIMLAI) presents contributions in the fields of (i) interpretable ML and AI, i.e., algorithms that are natively interpretable, and (ii) interpretability modules, i.e., explanation layers on top of black-box models, also called post-hoc interpretability. AIMLAI encourages interdisciplinary collaborations with particular emphasis in knowledge management, infovis, human computer interaction and psychology. It also welcomes applied research for use cases where interpretability matters.

Rule-based explanations are a popular method to understand the rationale behind the answers of complex machine learning (ML) classifiers. Recent approaches, such as Anchors, focus on local explanations based on if-then rules that are applicable in the vicinity of a target instance. This has proved effective at producing faithful explanations, yet anchor-based explanations are not free of limitations. These include long overly specific rules as well as explanations of low fidelity. This work presents two simple methods that can mitigate such issues on tabular and textual data. The first approach proposes a careful selection of the discretization method for numerical attributes in tabular datasets. The second one applies the notion of pertinent negatives to explanations on textual data. Our experimental evaluation shows the positive impact of such methods on the quality of anchor-based explanations.

International audience

Current RDF knowledge bases (KBs) are highly incomplete. This incompleteness is a serious problem both for data users and producers. Users do not have guarantees that queries that are run on a KB deliver complete results. Data producers, on the other hand, are blind about the parts of the KB that are incomplete. Yet, completeness information management is poorly supported in the Semantic Web. No RDF storage engine supports reasoning with completeness statements. Moreover, SPARQL cannot express completeness constraints for queries. Motivated by these observations, this paper offers a vision on completeness-aware RDF querying. Our vision includes (1) the sketch of a method to reason about completeness in RDF knowledge bases, (2) two approaches to represent completeness information for SPARQL queries, and (3) an extension for the SPARQL language to express completeness constraints in queries.

Knowledge bases such as Wikidata, DBpedia, or YAGO contain millions of entities and facts. In some knowledge bases, the correctness of these facts has been evaluated. However, much less is known about their completeness, i.e., the proportion of real facts that the knowledge bases cover. In this work, we investigate different signals to identify the areas where a knowledge base is complete. We show that we can combine these signals in a rule mining approach, which allows us to predict where facts may be missing. We also show that completeness predictions can help other applications such as fact prediction.

Open information extraction approaches have led to the creation of large knowledge bases from the Web. The problem with such methods is that their entities and relations are not canonicalized, leading to redundant and ambiguous facts. For example, they may store {Barack Obama, was born, Honolulu and {Obama, place of birth, Honolulu}. In this paper, we present an approach based on machine learning methods that can canonicalize such Open IE triples, by clustering synonymous names and phrases.

Recent advances in information extraction have led to huge knowledge bases (KBs), which capture knowledge in a machine-readable format. Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) can be used to mine logical rules from the KB. These rules can help deduce and add missing knowledge to the KB. While ILP is a mature field, mining logical rules from KBs is different in two aspects: First, current rule mining systems are easily overwhelmed by the amount of data (state-of-the art systems cannot even run on today's KBs). Second, ILP usually requires counterexamples. KBs, however, implement the open world assumption (OWA), meaning that absent data cannot be used as counterexamples. In this paper, we develop a rule mining model that is explicitly tailored to support the OWA scenario. It is inspired by association rule mining and introduces a novel measure for confidence. Our extensive experiments show that our approach outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in terms of precision and coverage. Furthermore, our system, AMIE, mines rules orders of magnitude faster than state-of-the-art approaches.