Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Testing machine learning explanation methods
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Testing machine learning explanation methods
Do you wish to request the book?
Testing machine learning explanation methods
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Testing machine learning explanation methods
2023
Overview
There are many methods for explaining why a machine learning model produces a given output in response to a given input. The relative merits of these methods are often debated using theoretical arguments and illustrative examples. This paper provides a large-scale empirical test of four widely used explanation methods by comparing how well their algorithmically generated denial reasons align with lender-provided denial reasons using a dataset of home mortgage applications. On a held-out sample of 10,000 denied applications, Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) correspond most closely with lender-provided reasons. SHAP is also the most computationally efficient. As a second contribution, this paper presents a method for computing integrated gradient explanations that can be used for non-differentiable models such as XGBoost.
Publisher
Springer London,Springer Nature B.V
