A survey of methods and tools used for interpreting Random Forest

Maissae Haddouchi, A. Berrado
{"title":"A survey of methods and tools used for interpreting Random Forest","authors":"Maissae Haddouchi, A. Berrado","doi":"10.1109/ICSSD47982.2019.9002770","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interpretability of highly performant Machine Learning [ML] methods, such as Random Forest [RF], is a key tool that attracts a great interest in datamining research. In the state of the art, RF is well-known as an efficient ensemble learning (in terms of predictive accuracy, flexibility and straightforwardness). Moreover, it is recognized as an intuitive and intelligible approach regarding to its building process. However it is also regarded as a Black Box model because of its hundreds of deep decision trees. This can be crucial for several fields of study, such as healthcare, biology and security, where the lack of interpretability could be a real disadvantage. Indeed, the interpretability of the RF models is, generally, necessary in such fields of applications because of different motivations. In fact, the more the ML users grasp what is going on inside a ML system (process and resulting model), the more they can trust it and take actions based on the knowledge extracted from it. Furthermore, ML models are increasingly constrained by new laws that require regulation and interpretation of the knowledge they provide.Several papers have tackled the interpretation of RF resulting models. It had been associated with different aspects depending on the specificity of the issue studied as well as the users concerned with explanations. Therefore, this paper aims to provide a survey of tools and methods used in literature in order to uncover insights in the RF resulting models. These tools are classified depending on different aspects characterizing the interpretability. This should guide, in practice, in the choice of the most useful tools for interpretation and deep analysis of the RF model depending on the interpretability aspect sought. This should also be valuable for researchers who aim to focus their work on the interpretability of RF, or ML in general.","PeriodicalId":342806,"journal":{"name":"2019 1st International Conference on Smart Systems and Data Science (ICSSD)","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 1st International Conference on Smart Systems and Data Science (ICSSD)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSD47982.2019.9002770","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Interpretability of highly performant Machine Learning [ML] methods, such as Random Forest [RF], is a key tool that attracts a great interest in datamining research. In the state of the art, RF is well-known as an efficient ensemble learning (in terms of predictive accuracy, flexibility and straightforwardness). Moreover, it is recognized as an intuitive and intelligible approach regarding to its building process. However it is also regarded as a Black Box model because of its hundreds of deep decision trees. This can be crucial for several fields of study, such as healthcare, biology and security, where the lack of interpretability could be a real disadvantage. Indeed, the interpretability of the RF models is, generally, necessary in such fields of applications because of different motivations. In fact, the more the ML users grasp what is going on inside a ML system (process and resulting model), the more they can trust it and take actions based on the knowledge extracted from it. Furthermore, ML models are increasingly constrained by new laws that require regulation and interpretation of the knowledge they provide.Several papers have tackled the interpretation of RF resulting models. It had been associated with different aspects depending on the specificity of the issue studied as well as the users concerned with explanations. Therefore, this paper aims to provide a survey of tools and methods used in literature in order to uncover insights in the RF resulting models. These tools are classified depending on different aspects characterizing the interpretability. This should guide, in practice, in the choice of the most useful tools for interpretation and deep analysis of the RF model depending on the interpretability aspect sought. This should also be valuable for researchers who aim to focus their work on the interpretability of RF, or ML in general.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于解释随机森林的方法和工具的调查
高性能机器学习[ML]方法的可解释性,如随机森林[RF],是吸引数据挖掘研究极大兴趣的关键工具。在目前的技术状态中,RF被认为是一种高效的集成学习(在预测准确性、灵活性和直观性方面)。此外,它被认为是一种直观和可理解的方法,关于其建设过程。然而,它也被认为是一个黑盒模型,因为它有数百个深度决策树。这对于医疗保健、生物学和安全等几个研究领域至关重要,在这些领域,缺乏可解释性可能是一个真正的劣势。实际上,由于动机不同,RF模型的可解释性通常在这些应用领域是必要的。事实上,机器学习用户对机器学习系统(过程和结果模型)内部发生的事情了解得越多,他们就越能信任它,并根据从中提取的知识采取行动。此外,ML模型越来越多地受到新法律的约束,这些法律要求对它们提供的知识进行监管和解释。有几篇论文讨论了射频结果模型的解释。根据所研究问题的特殊性以及与解释有关的用户,它与不同方面有关。因此,本文旨在提供文献中使用的工具和方法的调查,以揭示RF结果模型中的见解。这些工具根据描述可解释性的不同方面进行分类。在实践中,这应该指导根据所寻求的可解释性方面选择最有用的工具来解释和深入分析RF模型。对于那些致力于研究RF或ML的可解释性的研究人员来说,这也应该是有价值的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Determination of Merchant Ships that Most Likely to be Autonomously Operated Adaptation of Classical Machine Learning Algorithms to Big Data Context: Problems and Challenges : Case Study: Hidden Markov Models Under Spark Predictive Process Monitoring related to the remaining time dimension: a value-driven framework Decomposition and Visualization of High-Dimensional Data in a Two Dimensional Interface Black SDN for WSN
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1