IP Library Granted Patent US 11,615,331
Granted Patent B2
US 11,615,331 · App. 16/019,120 · Granted Mar 28, 2023

Explainable artificial intelligence

Inventors: Chung-Sheng Li (San Jose, CA); Guanglei Xiong (Pleasanton, CA); Ashish Jain (Chennai, IN); Emmanuel Munguia Tapia (San Jose, CA); Sukryool Kang (Sunnyvale, CA); Benjamin Nathan Grosof (Mercer Island, WA)
Assignee: ACCENTURE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LIMITED
G06N5/048G06N5/022G06N5/042G06N20/00G06N5/045
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 11,615,331
App. No.
16/019,120
Granted
Mar 28, 2023
Kind
B2
Abstract

Examples of artificial intelligence-based reasoning explanation are described. In an example implementation, a knowledge model having a plurality of ontologies and a plurality of inferencing rules is generated. Once the knowledge model is generated, based on a real-world problem, a knowledge model from amongst various knowledge models is selected to be used for resolving a real-world problem. The data procured from the real-world problem is clustered and classified into an ontology of the determined knowledge model. Inferencing rules to be used for deconstructing the real-world problem are identified, and a machine reasoning is generated to provide a hypothesis for the problem and an explanation to accompany the hypothesis.

Claims (51)

1. An artificial intelligence (AI) system comprising:

a processor; and

a memory storing instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the system to:

generate one or more knowledge models, each of the knowledge models comprising a plurality of ontologies and a plurality of inferencing rules for generating an explanation for a decision made by the AI system, wherein, to generate the one or more knowledge models, the processor is configured to:

create the plurality of ontologies based on data procured from real-world interactions, the data procured being real-world data, the real-world data comprising structured data, unstructured data, and semi-structured data; and

construct the plurality of inferencing rules based on the plurality of ontologies and the real-world data procured from the real-world interactions; and

wherein, for decision-making when faced with a real-world problem, the processor is to:

select a knowledge model from the generated one or more knowledge models to be used for resolving the real-world problem, based on the real-world problem; and

execute a decision-making process and generate an explanation for the decision made, wherein, to execute the decision-making process and to generate an explanation for the decision made, the processor is configured to:

classify and cluster data procured from the real-world problem into an ontology of the selected knowledge model by:

clustering the data procured from the real-world problem into a plurality of clusters; and

mapping the plurality of clusters with the plurality of ontologies of the selected knowledge model to refine the clusters and the ontologies;

identify inferencing rules to be used for deconstructing the real-world problem, wherein the identified inferencing rules are triggered using a backward chaining process, wherein in the backward chaining process, the identified inferencing rules are used to evaluate sub-problems from the real-world problem and create a tree of goals, by matching the identified inferencing rules against the corresponding goals while traversing in a depth-first and a left-to-right manner; and

provide a machine-learning based reasoning to provide a hypothesis for the real-world problem and an explanation to accompany the hypothesis, wherein the processor is to determine a confidence level parameter indicating a strength of the explanation for the decision made based on the identified inferencing rules, and wherein the confidence level parameter further indicates “value at risk” of the decision.

2. The AI system as claimed in claim 1 , wherein the processor is to generate a visual representation of the decision and the explanation using machine learning techniques.

3. The AI system as claimed in claim 1 , wherein the processor is to parse the real-world problem to curate logical sentences in the real-world problem.

4. The AI system as claimed in claim 1 ; wherein the processor is to provide a human-readable form of the deconstruction of the real-world problem to preview a line of reasoning.

5. An AI system comprising:

a processor; and

a memory storing instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the system to:

generate one or more knowledge models, each of the knowledge models comprising a plurality of ontologies and a plurality of inferencing rules for generating an explanation for a decision made by the AI system, wherein, to generate the one or more knowledge models, the processor is configured to:

create the plurality of ontologies based on data procured from real-world interactions, the data procured being real-world data, the real-world data comprising structured data, unstructured data, and semi-structured data, wherein the processor is to utilize inductive reasoning techniques for creating the ontology; and

construct the plurality of inferencing rules based on the plurality of ontologies and the real-world data procured from the real-world interactions, wherein the processor is to utilize deductive reasoning techniques for creating the plurality of inferencing rules; and

wherein, for decision-making when faced with a real-world problem, the processor is to:

select a knowledge model from the generated one or more knowledge models to be used for resolving the real-world problem, based on the real-world problem; and

execute a decision-making process and generate an explanation for the decision made, wherein, to execute the decision-making process and to generate an explanation for the decision made, the processor is configured to:

classify and cluster data procured from the real-world problem into an ontology of the selected knowledge model by:

clustering the data procured from the real-world problem into a plurality of clusters; and

mapping the plurality of clusters with the plurality of ontologies of the selected knowledge model to refine the clusters and the ontologies;

identify inferencing rules to be used for de-constructing the real-world problem, wherein the processor is to utilize the deductive reasoning techniques for deconstructing the real-world problem, wherein the identified inferencing rules are triggered using a backward chaining process, wherein in the backward chaining process, the identified inferencing rules are used to evaluate sub-problems from the real-world problem and create a tree of goals, by matching the identified inferencing rules against the corresponding goals while traversing in a depth-first and a left-to-right manner;

provide a machine-generated reasoning to provide a hypothesis for the problem and an explanation to accompany the hypothesis, wherein abductive reasoning techniques are utilized for providing the hypothesis and the explanation; and

determine a confidence parameter, indicative of a strength of the explanation for the decision made based on the identified inferencing rules, wherein the confidence level parameter further indicates “value at risk” of the decision.

6. The AI system as claimed in claim 5 , wherein the processor is to build a strength of the explanation into the inferencing rules.

7. The AI system as claimed in claim 5 , wherein the processor is to parse the real-world problem to curate logical sentences in the real-world problem.

8. The AI system as claimed in claim 5 , wherein the processor is to provide a human-readable form of the deconstruction of the real-world problem to preview a line of reasoning.

9. The AI system as claimed in claim 5 , wherein the inductive reasoning techniques comprise one of supervised clustering techniques and unsupervised clustering techniques.

10. The AI system as claimed in claim 5 , wherein the abductive reasoning techniques comprise evidence-based reasoning techniques.

11. A non-transitory computer readable medium including machine readable instructions that are executable by a processor to:

generate one or more knowledge models, each of the knowledge models comprising a plurality of ontologies and a plurality of inferencing rules for generating an explanation for a decision made by an AI system, wherein generating the one or more knowledge models comprises creating the plurality of ontologies based on data procured from real-world interactions using inductive reasoning techniques for creating the ontology, and creating the plurality of inferencing rules based on the plurality of ontologies and the data procured from the real-world interactions using deductive reasoning techniques tor creating the plurality of inferencing rules;

determine a knowledge model from the generated one or more knowledge models to be used for resolving a real-world problem, based on the real-world problem;

classify and cluster data procured from the real-world problem into an ontology of the determined knowledge model by:

clustering the data procured from the real-world problem into a plurality of dusters; and

mapping the plurality of clusters with the plurality of ontologies of the determined knowledge model to refine the clusters and the ontologies;

identify inferencing rules to be used for deconstructing the real-world problem using deductive reasoning techniques for deconstructing the real-world problem, wherein the identified inferencing rules are triggered using a backward chaining process, wherein in the backward chaining process, the identified inferencing rules are used to evaluate sub-problems from the real-world problem and create a tree of goals, by matching the identified inferencing rules against the corresponding goals while traversing in a depth-first and a left-to-right manner;

provide a machine-learning based reasoning to provide a hypothesis for the problem and an explanation to accompany the hypothesis using abductive reasoning techniques for providing the hypothesis and the explanation; and

determine a confidence parameter, indicative of a strength of the explanation for the decision made based on the identified inferencing rules, wherein the confidence level parameter further indicates “value at risk” of the decision.

12. The non-transitory computer readable medium as claimed in claim 11 , wherein to provide the machine-learning based reasoning, the processor is to generate a visual representation of the decision and the explanation using machine learning techniques.

13. The non-transitory computer readable medium as claimed in claim 11 , wherein to identify the inferencing rule, the processor is to parse the real-world problem to curate logical sentences in the real-world problem.

14. The non-transitory computer readable medium as claimed in claim 11 , where-in to identify the inferencing rule, the processor is to provide a human-readable form of the deconstruction of the real-world problem to preview of a line of reasoning.

15. The non-transitory computer readable medium as claimed in claim 11 , where-in the inductive reasoning techniques comprise one of supervised clustering techniques and unsupervised clustering techniques.

16. The non-transitory computer readable medium as claimed in claim 11 , where-in the abductive reasoning techniques comprise evidence-based reasoning techniques.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jul 10, 2018
From: LI, CHUNG-SHENG; XIONG, GUANGLEI; JAIN, ASHISH; MUNGUIA TAPIA, EMMANUEL; KANG, SUKRYOOL; GROSOF, BENJAMIN NATHAN
To: ACCENTURE GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LIMITED
Reel/Frame 046307/0603 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 62626460 · Feb 5, 2018
Related Publication 20190244122A1 · Aug 8, 2019
Cited By (1)
US 12,561,709