Is the MMI Criterion Necessary for Interpretability? Degenerating Non-causal Features to Plain Noise for Self-Rationalization
Wei Liu, Zhiying Deng, Zhongyu Niu, Jun Wang, Haozhao Wang, YuanKai Zhang, Ruixuan Li
摘要
An important line of research in the field of explainability is to extract a small subset of crucial rationales from the full input. The most widely used criterion for rationale extraction is the maximum mutual information (MMI) criterion. However, in certain datasets, there are spurious features non-causally correlated with the label and also get high mutual information, complicating the loss landscape of MMI. Although some penalty-based methods have been developed to penalize the spurious features (e.g., invariance penalty, intervention penalty, etc) to help MMI work better, these are merely remedial measures. In the optimization objectives of these methods, spurious features are still distinguished from plain noise, which hinders the discovery of causal rationales. This paper aims to develop a new criterion that treats spurious features as plain noise, allowing the model to work on datasets rich in spurious features as if it were working on clean datasets, thereby making rationale extraction easier. We theoretically observe that removing either plain noise or spurious features from the input does not alter the conditional distribution of the remaining components relative to the task label. However, significant changes in the conditional distribution occur only when causal features are eliminated. Based on this discovery, the paper proposes a criterion for Maximizing the Remaining Discrepancy (MRD). Experiments on six widely used datasets show that our MRD criterion improves rationale quality (measured by the overlap with human-annotated rationales) by up to as compared to several recent competitive MMI variants. Code: https://github.com/jugechengzi/Rationalization-MRD.
问问这篇 Paper
智能体会读完全文。
Lune 把这篇 Paper 索引到了最后一个公式,引用它的顶会 Paper 也一样。你提问,回答直接引用原文。
引用它的顶会 Paper10
- GNN Explanations that do not Explain and How to find ThemSteve Azzolin, Stefano Teso, Bruno Lepri, Andrea Passerini 等ICLR 2026 · 被引用 4 次
- Beyond External Monitors: Enhancing Transparency of Large Language Models for Easier MonitoringGuanxu Chen, Jing Shao, Tao Luo, Lijie Hu 等ICML 2026 · 被引用 2 次
- Boosting Explainability through Selective Rationalization in Pre-trained Language ModelsLibing Yuan, Shuaibo Hu, Kui Yu, Le WuKDD 2025 · 被引用 1 次
- Interlocking-free Selective Rationalization Through Genetic-based LearningFederico Ruggeri, Gaetano SignorelliACL 2025 · 被引用 1 次
- Adversarial Cooperative Rationalization: The Risk of Spurious Correlations in Even Clean DatasetsWei Liu, Zhongyu Niu, Lang Gao, Zhiying Deng 等ICML 2025
它引用的顶会 Paper22
- Parameterized Explainer for Graph Neural NetworkDongsheng Luo, Wei Cheng, Dongkuan Xu, Wenchao Yu 等NeurIPS 2020 · 被引用 888 次
- LESS: Selecting Influential Data for Targeted Instruction TuningMengzhou Xia, Sadhika Malladi, Suchin Gururangan, Sanjeev Arora 等ICML 2024 · 被引用 460 次
- The Risks of Invariant Risk MinimizationElan Rosenfeld, Pradeep Kumar Ravikumar, Andrej RisteskiICLR 2021 · 被引用 356 次
- Discovering Invariant Rationales for Graph Neural NetworksYingxin Wu, Xiang Wang, An Zhang, Xiangnan He 等ICLR 2022 · 被引用 313 次
- Invariant RationalizationShiyu Chang, Yang Zhang, Mo Yu, Tommi S. JaakkolaICML 2020 · 被引用 232 次
相关 Paper
- D-Separation for Causal Self-ExplanationWei Liu, Jun Wang, Haozhao Wang, Ruixuan Li 等NeurIPS 2023 · 被引用 29 次
- Breaking Free from MMI: A New Frontier in Rationalization by Probing Input UtilizationWei Liu, Zhiying Deng, Zhongyu Niu, Jun Wang 等ICLR 2025
- Making a (Counterfactual) Difference One Rationale at a TimeMitchell Plyler, Michael Green, Min ChiNeurIPS 2021 · 被引用 12 次
- Interventional RationalizationLinan Yue, Qi Liu, Li Wang, Yanqing An 等EMNLP 2023 · 被引用 8 次
- Towards Trustworthy Explanation: On Causal RationalizationWenbo Zhang, Tong Wu, Yunlong Wang, Yong Cai 等ICML 2023 · 被引用 25 次
