Neural networks are among the most accurate supervised learning methods in use today. However, their opacity makes them difficult to trust in critical applications, especially if conditions in training may differ from those in test. Recent work on explanations for black-box models has produced tools (e.g. LIME) to show the implicit rules behind predictions. These tools can help us identify when models are right for the wrong reasons. However, these methods do not scale to explaining entire datasets and cannot correct the problems they reveal. We introduce a method for efficiently explaining and regularizing differentiable models by examining and selectively penalizing their input gradients. We apply these penalties both based on expert annotation and in an unsupervised fashion that produces multiple classifiers with qualitatively different decision boundaries. On multiple datasets, we show our approach generates faithful explanations and models that generalize much better when conditions differ between training and test.

We propose a Bayesian nonparametric approach to the problem of jointly modeling multiple related time series. Our model discovers a latent set of dynamical behaviors shared among the sequences, and segments each time series into regions defined by a subset of these behaviors. Using a beta process prior, the size of the behavior set and the sharing pattern are both inferred from data. We develop Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods based on the Indian buffet process representation of the predictive distribution of the beta process. Our MCMC inference algorithm efficiently adds and removes behaviors via novel split-merge moves as well as data-driven birth and death proposals, avoiding the need to consider a truncated model. We demonstrate promising results on unsupervised segmentation of human motion capture data.

Background Interest in the application of machine learning (ML) to the design, conduct, and analysis of clinical trials has grown, but the evidence base for such applications has not been surveyed. This manuscript reviews the proceedings of a multi-stakeholder conference to discuss the current and future state of ML for clinical research. Key areas of clinical trial methodology in which ML holds particular promise and priority areas for further investigation are presented alongside a narrative review of evidence supporting the use of ML across the clinical trial spectrum. Results Conference attendees included stakeholders, such as biomedical and ML researchers, representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), artificial intelligence technology and data analytics companies, non-profit organizations, patient advocacy groups, and pharmaceutical companies. ML contributions to clinical research were highlighted in the pre-trial phase, cohort selection and participant management, and data collection and analysis. A particular focus was paid to the operational and philosophical barriers to ML in clinical research. Peer-reviewed evidence was noted to be lacking in several areas. Conclusions ML holds great promise for improving the efficiency and quality of clinical research, but substantial barriers remain, the surmounting of which will require addressing significant gaps in evidence.

No abstract

The lack of interpretability remains a key barrier to the adoption of deep models in many applications. In this work, we explicitly regularize deep models so human users might step through the process behind their predictions in little time. Specifically, we train deep time-series models so their class-probability predictions have high accuracy while being closely modeled by decision trees with few nodes. Using intuitive toy examples as well as medical tasks for treating sepsis and HIV, we demonstrate that this new tree regularization yields models that are easier for humans to simulate than simpler L1 or L2 penalties without sacrificing predictive power.