When factorization meets argumentation: towards argumentative explanations
Factorization-based models have gained popularity since the Netflix challenge {(2007)}. Since that, various factorization-based models have been developed and these models have been proven to be efficient in predicting users' ratings towards items. A major concern is that explaining the recommendations generated by such methods is non-trivial because the explicit meaning of the latent factors they learn are not always clear. In response, we propose a novel model that combines factorization-based methods with argumentation frameworks (AFs). The integration of AFs provides clear meaning at each stage of the model, enabling it to produce easily understandable explanations for its recommendations. In this model, for every user-item interaction, an AF is defined in which the features of items are considered as arguments, and the users' ratings towards these features determine the strength and polarity of these arguments. This perspective allows our model to treat feature attribution as a structured argumentation procedure, where each calculation is marked with explicit meaning, enhancing its inherent interpretability. Additionally, our framework seamlessly incorporates side information, such as user contexts, leading to more accurate predictions. We anticipate at least three practical applications for our model: creating explanation templates, providing interactive explanations, and generating contrastive explanations. Through testing on real-world datasets, we have found that our model, along with its variants, not only surpasses existing argumentation-based methods but also competes effectively with current context-free and context-aware methods.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Argumentation for Explainable Scheduling (Full Paper with Proofs)
Mathematical optimization offers highly-effective tools for finding solutions for problems with well-defined goals, notably scheduling. However, optimization solvers are often unexplainable black boxes whose solutions ar…
Abstract ArgumentationSchedulingExplaining Causal Models with Argumentation: the Case of Bi-variate Reinforcement
Causal models are playing an increasingly important role in machine learning, particularly in the realm of explainable AI. We introduce a conceptualisation for generating argumentation frameworks (AFs) from causal models…
Explainable Decision Making with Lean and Argumentative Explanations
It is widely acknowledged that transparency of automated decision making is crucial for deployability of intelligent systems, and explaining the reasons why some decisions are "good" and some are not is a way to achievin…
Decision MakingArgumentative Explanations for Pattern-Based Text Classifiers
Recent works in Explainable AI mostly address the transparency issue of black-box models or create explanations for any kind of models (i.e., they are model-agnostic), while leaving explanations of interpretable models l…
Binary text classificationregressionSpecificitytext-classification+1Neurosymbolic Learning for Inference-Time Argumentation
Claim verification is an important problem in high-stakes settings, including health and finance. When information underpinning claims is incomplete or conflicting, uncertain answers may be more appropriate than binary t…