Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences

Tim Miller

2018-08-15

Abstract:There has been a recent resurgence in the area of explainable artificial intelligence as researchers and practitioners seek to make their algorithms more understandable. Much of this research is focused on explicitly explaining decisions or actions to a human observer, and it should not be controversial to say that looking at how humans explain to each other can serve as a useful starting point for explanation in artificial intelligence. However, it is fair to say that most work in explainable artificial intelligence uses only the researchers' intuition of what constitutes a `good' explanation. There exists vast and valuable bodies of research in philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science of how people define, generate, select, evaluate, and present explanations, which argues that people employ certain cognitive biases and social expectations towards the explanation process. This paper argues that the field of explainable artificial intelligence should build on this existing research, and reviews relevant papers from philosophy, cognitive psychology/science, and social psychology, which study these topics. It draws out some important findings, and discusses ways that these can be infused with work on explainable artificial intelligence.

Artificial Intelligence

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper primarily explores the issue of interpretability in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and attempts to draw on experiences from social sciences to enhance the interpretability of AI systems. Specifically, the author Tim Miller argues that most work in the current research on Explainable AI (XAI) relies solely on researchers' personal intuitions about what constitutes a "good" explanation, without adequately leveraging the rich body of research from social sciences such as philosophy, psychology, and sociology on how humans define, generate, select, evaluate, and present explanations.

The core objectives of the paper can be summarized as follows:

1. **Emphasize the importance of existing social science findings**: The author advocates for integrating these social science research findings into XAI research to build AI systems that can better communicate with human users. Existing XAI research often overlooks these social science insights, which may lead to limitations in XAI systems.

2. **Outline theories of explanation in social sciences**: The paper reviews theories related to explanations in philosophy, cognitive psychology, and social psychology, including the concept of explanation, mechanisms of explanation selection, and the social nature of explanations. These theories help understand human biases and expectations in the explanation process, thereby guiding the design of XAI.

3. **Promote the integration of social sciences and XAI**: Through a literature review, the author distills several key findings, suggesting that these recommendations are crucial for the development of XAI. For example, explanations are often contrastive (people ask why event P happened instead of Q), the selection of explanations is influenced by cognitive biases, probability may be less important than causality in explanations, and explanations are inherently a social interaction process.

4. **Propose recommendations for XAI design**: Based on the theoretical analysis mentioned above, the paper also offers suggestions on how to apply these social science insights to XAI design. For instance, designing systems that can provide contrastive explanations, considering users' cognitive biases in explanation selection, and building explanation mechanisms capable of social interaction.

In summary, the main issue this paper attempts to address is: how to utilize research findings from social sciences to improve current XAI systems, making them more aligned with human users' needs, thereby increasing the acceptability and trustworthiness of AI systems.