Home / Current Issue / Paper 1706039
Enhancing Transparency and Understanding in AI Decision-Making Processes
Subject area: Science,Engineering and Technology · Area of research: AI Decision-Making
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are integral to sectors like healthcare, finance, and criminal justice, offering superior decision-making capabilities. However, the opacity of these processes can undermine user trust and accountability. This paper explores methods to enhance transparency and understanding in AI, including model-agnostic approaches like LIME and SHAP, and intrinsically interpretable models such as decision trees and rule-based systems. It also proposes strategies like hybrid models, user-centric design, and regulatory frameworks to enforce transparency. Case studies in healthcare and finance demonstrate these strategies' practical applications, aiming to balance AI's technical performance with transparency and ethical deployment.
Keywords
AI transparency, explainable AI, interpretability, decision-making processes
References
[1] Binns, R. (2018). Fairness in Machine Learning: Lessons from Political Philosophy. Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency.
[2] Breiman, L. (2001). Random Forests. Machine Learning, 45(1), 5-32.
[3] Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C. J., & Olshen, R. A. (1984). Classification and Regression Trees. CRC Press.
[4] Gunning, D. (2017). Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI). DARPA.
[5] Lundberg, S. M., & Lee, S.-I. (2017). A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.
[6] Mitchell, T. M. (1997). Machine Learning. McGraw-Hill.
[7] Ribeiro, M. T., Singh, S., & Guestrin, C. (2016). "Why Should I Trust You?": Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining.
[8] Rudin, C. (2019). Stop Explaining Black Box Machine Learning Models for High Stakes Decisions and Use Interpretable Models Instead. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(5), 206-215.
[9] Wachter, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Russell, C. (2017). Counterfactual Explanations without Opening the Black Box: Automated Decisions and the GDPR. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 31(2), 841-887.
How to cite this paper
@article{1706039,
author = {Vinayak Pillai},
title = {Enhancing Transparency and Understanding in AI Decision-Making Processes},
journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
year = {2024},
volume = {8},
number = {1},
pages = {168-172},
issn = {2456-8880},
url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1706039.pdf},
abstract = {Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are integral to sectors like healthcare, finance, and criminal justice, offering superior decision-making capabilities. However, the opacity of these processes can undermine user trust and accountability. This paper explores methods to enhance transparency and understanding in AI, including model-agnostic approaches like LIME and SHAP, and intrinsically interpretable models such as decision trees and rule-based systems. It also proposes strategies like hybrid models, user-centric design, and regulatory frameworks to enforce transparency. Case studies in healthcare and finance demonstrate these strategies' practical applications, aiming to balance AI's technical performance with transparency and ethical deployment.},
keywords = {AI transparency, explainable AI, interpretability, decision-making processes},
month = {July},
}