IP Library Granted Patent US 12,536,151
Granted Patent B2
US 12,536,151 · App. 18/057,776 · Granted Jan 27, 2026

Accurate and query-efficient model agnostic explanations

Inventors: Amit Dhurandhar (Yorktown Heights, NY); Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy (Pleasantville, NY); Karthikeyan Shanmugam (Bengaluru, IN)
Assignee: INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
G06F16/2365G06F16/2453
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 12,536,151
App. No.
18/057,776
Granted
Jan 27, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

One or more systems, devices, computer program products and/or computer-implemented methods of use provided herein relate to a process for providing an explanation result for an analytical model. A system can comprise a memory that stores computer executable components, and a processor that executes the computer executable components stored in the memory, wherein the computer executable components can comprise an uncertainty component that determines an uncertainty score for a distribution of samples that neighbor a selected input to an analytical model, a sampling component that identifies a subset of the distribution of samples based on the uncertainty score, and an explanation component that generates an explanation of an output of the analytical model, corresponding to the selected input, based on use of a sample from the subset of the distribution of samples.

Claims (50)

1 . A system, comprising:

a memory that stores computer executable components; and

a processor that executes at least one of the computer executable components that

iteratively, until an uncertainty score for a distribution of samples satisfies a defined confidence threshold and the distribution of samples fall on a straight line extending from a selected input:

selects, based on a defined selection process, a set of inputs from a set of samples neighboring the selected input, wherein the set of samples neighboring the selected input are scattered in a non-linear region surrounding the selected input,

generates, using an analytical model, a set of outputs based on the set of inputs,

determines the distribution of samples based on the set of outputs, and

determines the uncertainty score for the distribution of samples, wherein the uncertainty score indicates a level of confidence that relevant neighbor samples for the selected input are within the distribution of samples;

identifies a subset of the distribution of samples based on the uncertainty score; and

generates an explanation of an output of the analytical model generated using the selected input, based on use of a sample from the subset of the distribution of samples.

2 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the distribution of samples define local boundaries of a neighborhood surrounding the selected input.

3 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the determining the distribution of samples employs a multidimensional piecewise segmented regression.

4 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the at least one of the computer executable components further:

generates a proxy model based on fitting a regression model to the subset of the distribution of samples.

5 . The system of claim 4 , wherein the proxy model has a first algorithmic complexity that is lesser than a second algorithmic complexity of the analytical model.

6 . The system of claim 4 , wherein the at least one of the computer executable components further:

outputs from the proxy model a proxy output based on a sample input of at least one sample of the subset of the distribution of samples, and wherein the explanation is generated based on the proxy output.

7 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the system is analytical model agnostic.

8 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the at least one of the computer executable components further:

generates an image representing the explanation.

9 . A computer-implemented method, comprising:

iteratively, until an uncertainty score for a distribution of samples satisfies a defined confidence threshold and the distribution of samples fall on a straight line extending from a selected input:

selecting, by a system operatively coupled to a processor, based on a defined selection process, a set of inputs from a set of samples neighboring the selected input, wherein the set of samples neighboring the selected input are scattered in a non-linear region surrounding the selected input,

generating, by the system, using an analytical model, a set of outputs based on the set of inputs,

determining, by the system, the distribution of samples based on the set of outputs, and

determining, by the system, the uncertainty score for the distribution of samples, wherein the uncertainty score indicates a level of confidence that relevant neighbor samples for the selected input are within the distribution of samples;

identifying, by the system, a subset of the distribution of samples based on the uncertainty score; and

generating, by the system, an explanation of an output of the analytical model, generated using the selected input, based on use of a sample from the subset of the distribution of samples.

10 . The computer-implemented method of claim 9 , wherein the distribution of samples define local boundaries of a neighborhood surrounding the selected input.

11 . The computer-implemented method of claim 9 , wherein the determining the distribution of samples employs a multidimensional piecewise segmented regression.

12 . The computer-implemented method of claim 11 , wherein the multidimensional piecewise segmented regression comprises a multidimensional piecewise linear segmented regression or a multidimensional piecewise polynomial segmented regression.

13 . The computer-implemented method of claim 9 , further comprising:

generating, by the system, a proxy model based on fitting a regression model to the subset of the distribution of samples.

14 . The computer-implemented method of claim 13 , further comprising:

outputting, by the system, from the proxy model a proxy output based on a sample input of at least one sample of the subset of the distribution of samples, and wherein the explanation is generated based on the proxy output.

15 . A computer program product facilitating a process for providing an explanation result for an analytical model, the computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a processor to cause the processor to:

iteratively, until an uncertainty score for a distribution of samples satisfies a defined confidence threshold and the distribution of samples fall on a straight line extending from a selected input:

select, based on a defined selection process, a set of inputs from a set of samples neighboring the selected input, wherein the set of samples neighboring the selected input are scattered in a non-linear region surrounding the selected input,

generate, using the analytical model, a set of outputs based on the set of inputs,

determine the distribution of samples based on the set of outputs, and

determine the uncertainty score for the distribution of samples, wherein the uncertainty score indicates a level of confidence that relevant neighbor samples for the selected input are within the distribution of samples;

identify a subset of the distribution of samples based on the uncertainty score; and

generate an explanation of an output of the analytical model generated using the selected input, based on use of a sample from the subset of the distribution of samples.

16 . The computer program product of claim 15 , wherein the distribution of samples define local boundaries of a neighborhood surrounding the selected input.

17 . The computer program product of claim 16 , wherein the determining the distribution of samples employs a multidimensional piecewise segmented regression.

18 . The computer program product of claim 17 , wherein the multidimensional piecewise segmented regression comprises a multidimensional piecewise linear segmented regression or a multidimensional piecewise polynomial segmented regression.

19 . The computer program product of claim 15 , wherein the program instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the processor to:

generate, by the processor, a proxy model based on fitting a regression model to the subset of the distribution of samples.

20 . The computer program product of claim 19 , wherein the program instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the processor to:

output, by the processor, from the proxy model a proxy output based on a sample input of at least one sample of the subset of the distribution of samples, and wherein the explanation is generated based on the proxy output.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 22, 2022
From: DHURANDHAR, AMIT; NATESAN RAMAMURTHY, KARTHIKEYAN; SHANMUGAM, KARTHIKEYAN
To: INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 061848/0203 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240168940A1 · May 23, 2024
References Cited (51)
US 11049043B2 · Dalli et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11556746B1 · Dasgupta · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20140372351A1 · Sun · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20180300792A1 · Dhurandhar · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20200167641A1 · Dhurandhar · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200184350A1 · Bhide · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200193243A1 · Dhurandhar · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210049503A1 · Nourian et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210056355A1 · Luss · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210133610A1 · Natesan Ramamurthy et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210358478A1 · Aggarwal et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220245502A1 · Sahagian et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220261400A1 · Pushak · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220327352A1 · Dey et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20230133868A1 · Todoriki · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230196109A1 · Todoriki · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230196129A1 · Shingu · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230206128A1 · Ishizaki · 2023 [cited by examiner]
CN 108197028B · 2020 [cited by applicant]
C. J. Anders, P. Pasliev, A.-K. Dombrowski, K.-R. Muller, and P. Kessel. Fairwashing explanations with off-manifold detergent. In Intl. Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2020. [cited by applicant]
T. Botari, F. Hvilshøj, R. Izbicki, and A. C. P. L. F. de Carvalho. Melime: Meaningful local explanation for machine learning models, 2020. [cited by applicant]
G. Casella, C. P. Robert, and M. T.Wells. Generalized accept-reject sampling schemes. Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2004. [cited by applicant]
D. Dheeru and E. Karra Taniskidou. UCI machine learning repository, 2017. [cited by applicant]
A. Dhurandhar, T. Pedapati, A. Balakrishnan, K. A. Pin-Yu Chen, Karthikeyan Shanmugam, and R. Puri. Model agnostic contrastive explanations for structured data. https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.00117, 2019. [cited by applicant]
A. Dhurandhar, K. Ramamurthy, K. Ahuja, and V. Arya. Locally invariant explanations: Towards stable and unidirectional explanations through local invariant learning. arXiv:2201.12143, 2022. [cited by applicant]
I. Diakonikolas, J. Li, and A. Voloshinov. Efficient algorithms for multidimensional segmented regression. arXiv:2003.11086, 2020. [cited by applicant]
FICO. Explainable machine learning challenge. https://community.fico.com/s/explainable-machine-learning-challenge?tabset-3158a=2, 2018. Accessed: Oct. 25, 2018. [cited by applicant]
E. Frank, Y. Wang, S. Inglis, G. Holmes, and I. H. Witten. Using model trees for classification. Machine Learning, 1998. [cited by applicant]
C. Frye, C. Rowat, and I. Feige. Asymmetric shapley values: incorporating causal knowledge into model-agnostic explainability. NeurIPS, 2020. [cited by applicant]
M. Garofalakis, D. Hyun, R. Rastogi, and K. Shim. Efficient algorithms for constructing decision trees with constraints. In Proceedings of the Sixth ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mi… [cited by applicant]
A. Ghorbani, A. Abid, and J. Zou. Interpretation of neural networks is fragile, 2019. [cited by applicant]
D. Gunning. Explainable artificial intelligence (xai). In Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 2017. [cited by applicant]
K. Gurumoorthy, A. Dhurandhar, G. Cecchi, and C. Aggarwal. Efficient data representation by selecting prototypes with importance weights. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Data Mining, 2019. [cited by applicant]
L. Hancox-Li. Robustness in machine learning explanations: does it matter? In Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. ACM, 2020. [cited by applicant]
M. Herlihy and N. Shavit. The art of multiprocessor programming. Elsevier, 2012. [cited by applicant]
T. Heskes, E. Sijben, I. G. Bucur, and T. Claassen. Causal shapley values: Exploiting causal knowledge to explain individual predictions of complex models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2020. [cited by applicant]
A. Ilyas, L. Engstrom, A. Athalye, and J. Lin. Black-box adversarial attacks with limited queries and information. Intl. Conference on Machine Learning, 2018. [cited by applicant]
A. Krizhevsky. Learning multiple layers of features from tiny images, 2009. [cited by applicant]
Z. Lu, H. Pu, F. Wang, Z. Hu, and L. Wang. The expressive power of neural networks: A view from the width. Advances in Neural Inf. Proc. Systems, 2017. [cited by applicant]
S. M. Lundberg and S.-I. Lee. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, pp. 4765-4774, 2017. [cited by applicant]
J. Pearl. Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference. Cambridge University Press, 2000. [cited by applicant]
T. Pedapati, A. Balakrishnan, K. Shanmugam, and A. Dhurandhar. Learning global transparent models consistent with local contrastive explanations. Advances in Neural Inf. Proc. Systems, 2020. [cited by applicant]
G. Plumb, D. Molitor, and A. Talwalkar. Model agnostic supervised local explanations. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, p. 2520-2529, 2018. [cited by applicant]
K. N. Ramamurthy, B. Vinzamuri, Y. Zhang, and A. Dhurandhar. Model agnostic multilevel explanations, 2020. [cited by applicant]
M. T. Ribeiro, S. Singh, and C. Guestrin. “Why should I trust you?”: Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 11… [cited by applicant]
H. Shah, K. Tamuly, A. Raghunathan, P. Jain, and P. Netrapalli. The pitfalls of simplicity bias in neural networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:9573-9585, 2020. [cited by applicant]
A. A. Shrotri, N. Narodytska, A. Ignatiev, J. Marques-Silva, K. S. Meel, and M. Vardi. Constraint-driven explanations of black-box {ml} models, 2021. [cited by applicant]
M. K. Vijaymeena and K. Kavitha. A survey on similarity measures in text mining. Machine Learning and Applications, 2016. [cited by applicant]
P. N. Yannella and O. Kagan. Analysis: Article 29 working party guidelines on automated decision making under gdpr. 2018. https://www.cyberadviserblog.com/2018/01/analysis-article-29-working-party-guidelines-on-automate… [cited by applicant]
Y. Zhang, K. Song, Y. Sun, S. Tan, and M. Udell. Why should you trust my explanation? ICML-AI for Social Good, 2019. [cited by applicant]
X. Zhao, W. Huang, X. Huang, V. Robu, and D. Flynn. Baylime: Bayesian local interpretable model-agnostic explanations. UAI, 2021. [cited by applicant]