Generative models often use latent variables to represent structured variation in high-dimensional data, such as images and medical waveforms. However, these latent variables may ignore subtle, yet meaningful features in the data. Some features may predict an outcome of interest (e.g. heart attack) but account for only a small fraction of variation in the data. We propose a generative model training objective that uses a black-box discriminative model as a regularizer to learn representations that preserve this predictive variation. With these discriminatively regularized latent variable models, we visualize and measure variation in the data that influence a black-box predictive model, enabling an expert to better understand each prediction. With this technique, we study models that use electrocardiograms to predict outcomes of clinical interest. We measure our approach on synthetic and real data with statistical summaries and an experiment carried out by a physician.

The issue of disagreements amongst human experts is a ubiquitous one in both machine learning and medicine. In medicine, this often corresponds to doctor disagreements on a patient diagnosis. In this work, we show that machine learning models can be successfully trained to give uncertainty scores to data instances that result in high expert disagreements. In particular, they can identify patient cases that would benefit most from a medical second opinion. Our central methodological finding is that Direct Uncertainty Prediction (DUP), training a model to predict an uncertainty score directly from the raw patient features, works better than Uncertainty Via Classification, the two step process of training a classifier and postprocessing the output distribution to give an uncertainty score. We show this both with a theoretical result, and on extensive evaluations on a large scale medical imaging application.