Current advances in Artificial Intelligence and machine learning in general, and deep learning in particular have reached unprecedented impact not only across research communities, but also over popular media channels. However, concerns about interpretability and accountability of AI have been raised by influential thinkers. In spite of the recent impact of AI, several works have identified the need for principled knowledge representation and reasoning mechanisms integrated with deep learning-based systems to provide sound and explainable models for such systems. Neural-symbolic computing aims at integrating, as foreseen by Valiant, two most fundamental cognitive abilities: the ability to learn from the environment, and the ability to reason from what has been learned. Neural-symbolic computing has been an active topic of research for many years, reconciling the advantages of robust learning in neural networks and reasoning and interpretability of symbolic representation. In this paper, we survey recent accomplishments of neural-symbolic computing as a principled methodology for integrated machine learning and reasoning. We illustrate the effectiveness of the approach by outlining the main characteristics of the methodology: principled integration of neural learning with symbolic knowledge representation and reasoning allowing for the construction of explainable AI systems. The insights provided by neural-symbolic computing shed new light on the increasingly prominent need for interpretable and accountable AI systems.
The key to success in machine learning (ML) is the use of effective data representations. Traditionally, data representations were hand-crafted. Recently it has been demonstrated that, given sufficient data, deep neural networks can learn effective implicit representations from simple input representations. However, for most scientific problems, the use of deep learning is not appropriate as the amount of available data is limited, and/or the output models must be explainable. Nevertheless, many scientific problems do have significant amounts of data available on related tasks, which makes them amenable to multi-task learning, i.e. learning many related problems simultaneously. Here we propose a novel and general representation learning approach for multi-task learning that works successfully with small amounts of data. The fundamental new idea is to transform an input intrinsic data representation (i.e., handcrafted features), to an extrinsic representation based on what a pre-trained set of models predict about the examples. This transformation has the dual advantages of producing significantly more accurate predictions, and providing explainable models. To demonstrate the utility of this transformative learning approach, we have applied it to three real-world scientific problems: drug-design (quantitative structure activity relationship learning), predicting human gene expression (across different tissue types and drug treatments), and meta-learning for machine learning (predicting which machine learning methods work best for a given problem). In all three problems, transformative machine learning significantly outperforms the best intrinsic representation.
The financial services industry has unique explainability and fairness challenges arising from compliance and ethical considerations in credit decisioning. These challenges complicate the use of model machine learning and artificial intelligence methods in business decision processes.
Deep models that are both effective and explainable are desirable in many settings; prior explainable models have been unimodal, offering either image-based visualization of attention weights or text-based generation of post-hoc justifications. We propose a multimodal approach to explanation, and argue that the two modalities provide complementary explanatory strengths. We collect two new datasets to define and evaluate this task, and propose a novel model which can provide joint textual rationale generation and attention visualization. Our datasets define visual and textual justifications of a classification decision for activity recognition tasks (ACT-X) and for visual question answering tasks (VQA-X). We quantitatively show that training with the textual explanations not only yields better textual justification models, but also better localizes the evidence that supports the decision. We also qualitatively show cases where visual explanation is more insightful than textual explanation, and vice versa, supporting our thesis that multimodal explanation models offer significant benefits over unimodal approaches.