Exploring Subjective Notions of Explainability through Counterfactual Visualization of Sentiment Analysis

The generation and presentation of counterfactual explanations (CFEs) are a commonly used, model-agnostic, approach to helping end-users reason about the validity of AI/ML model outputs. By demonstrating how sensitive the model's outputs are to minor variations, CFEs are thought to improve understanding of the model's behavior, identify potential biases, and increase the transparency of ‘black box models’. Here, we examine how CFEs support a diverse audience, both with and without technical expertise, to understand the results of an LLM-informed sentiment analysis. We conducted a preliminary pilot study with ten individuals with varied expertise from ranging NLP, ML, and ethics, to specific domains. All individuals were actively using or working with AI/ML technology as part of their daily jobs. Through semi-structured interviews grounded in a set of concrete examples, we examined how CFEs influence participants' perceptions of the model's correctness, fairness, and trust- worthiness, and how visualization of CFEs specifically influences those perceptions. We also surface how participants wrestle with their internal definitions of ‘explainability’, relative to what CFEs present, their cultures, and backgrounds, in addition to the, much more widely studied phenomena, of comparing their baseline expectations of the model's performance. Compared to prior research, our findings highlight the sociotechnical frictions that CFEs surface but do not necessarily remedy. We conclude with the design implications of developing transparent AI/ML visualization systems for more general tasks.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2024-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/beliv64461.2024.00007
Primary Topic
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Exploring Subjective Notions of Explainability through Counterfactual Visualization of Sentiment Analysis

Anamaria Crisan, Nathan Butters, Zoe
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
article

Exploring Subjective Notions of Explainability through Counterfactual Visualization of Sentiment Analysis

Anamaria Crisan, Nathan Butters, Zoe
article en

Abstract

The generation and presentation of counterfactual explanations (CFEs) are a commonly used, model-agnostic, approach to helping end-users reason about the validity of AI/ML model outputs. By demonstrating how sensitive the model's outputs are to minor variations, CFEs are thought to improve understanding of the model's behavior, identify potential biases, and increase the transparency of ‘black box models’. Here, we examine how CFEs support a diverse audience, both with and without technical expertise, to understand the results of an LLM-informed sentiment analysis. We conducted a preliminary pilot study with ten individuals with varied expertise from ranging NLP, ML, and ethics, to specific domains. All individuals were actively using or working with AI/ML technology as part of their daily jobs. Through semi-structured interviews grounded in a set of concrete examples, we examined how CFEs influence participants' perceptions of the model's correctness, fairness, and trust- worthiness, and how visualization of CFEs specifically influences those perceptions. We also surface how participants wrestle with their internal definitions of ‘explainability’, relative to what CFEs present, their cultures, and backgrounds, in addition to the, much more widely studied phenomena, of comparing their baseline expectations of the model's performance. Compared to prior research, our findings highlight the sociotechnical frictions that CFEs surface but do not necessarily remedy. We conclude with the design implications of developing transparent AI/ML visualization systems for more general tasks.

University of Waterloo (CA), Salesforce (United States) (US), Tableau Software (United States) (US)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 64%
Computational and Text Analysis Methods
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.