Abstract
It is conventional wisdom in machine learning and data mining that logical models such as rule sets are more interpretable than other models, and that among such rule-based models, simpler models are more interpretable than more complex ones. In this position paper, we question this latter assumption, and recapitulate evidence for and against this postulate. We also report the results of an evaluation in a crowd-sourcing study, which does not reveal a strong preference for simple rules, whereas we can observe a weak preference for longer rules in some domains. We then continue to review criteria for interpretability from the psychological literature, evaluate some of them, and briefly discuss their potential use in machine learning.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 853-898 |
Number of pages | 46 |
Journal | Machine Learning |
Volume | 109 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2020 |
Fields of science
- 102001 Artificial intelligence
- 102019 Machine learning
- 102028 Knowledge engineering
- 102033 Data mining
JKU Focus areas
- Digital Transformation